Lies My Teacher Told Me (Ch.3: 1493), James W. Loewen

Sanne Bergh

Eng48A

Journal for Loewen

Dec. 9, 2011

Author Quote

"The worshipful biographical vignettes of Columbus in our textbooks serve to indoctrinate students into a mindless endorsement of colonialism... the Columbus myth allows us to accept the contemporary division of the world into developed and underdeveloped spheres as natural and given, rather than a historical product issuing from a process that began with Columbus's first voyage"

Internet Quote 

On his first voyage, Columbus kidnapped some ten to twenty-five Indians and took them back with him to Spain. Only seven or eight of the Indians arrived alive, but along with the parrots, gold trinkets, and other exotica, they caused quite a stir in Seville. Ferdinand and Isabella provided Columbus with seventeen ships, 1,200 to 1,500 men, cannons, crossbows, guns, cavalry, and attack dogs for a second voyage. 

Brief Summary

Columbus is depicted as a hero by many textbooks based upon the fact that he founded a part of America. However, he is really not the hero that he is made out to be. He kidnapped slaves, caused war, and acted like a monster.

Response/Reaction

In response to Columbus' gruesome and greedy behavior, I reflect on the Disney movie about Columbus I would watch when I was a small. Like many students, I was under the illusion that Columbus was indeed, a hero. Disney's colorful renditions have a specular ability to make even the worst American event seem like a positive affair. In Loewen's text, there was discussions of torture, battle, and cruelty which contradict my entire childhood. However, with all this new knowledge about Columbus, I came to the conclusion that he is not very smart. First of all, he wasn't even going in the right direction and lacked the navigational skills to go to where he was actually going. He thought he was in China or the West Indies, and then in the land he didn't know, he claimed it. If he were in China, would he have claimed it? Second of all, he was a racist. He looked down on the Indians and chopped off their hands, and to justify their enslavement he called them "cruel" and "stupid" which is simply hypocritical. In addition to his insults, his previous letters reflecting on his first voyage stated that the Indians were "of quick intelligence" and "well built". Additionally, I personally think that he went out on the voyage for all the wrong reasons. It was good that the Indians stood up for themselves. They stopped helping the Spanish, sensing that Columbus was probably going to kidnap them and enslave them. It's just arogant, mean and rude to go to another country, plant a flag on the ground and claim authority. Columbus shouldn't have been there in the first place, he was looking for a trade route. One whiff of "fame" or "fortune" and Columbus got his greedy little paws all over it. What's even greater is the fact that America celebrates the man. At least we can get fifty percent off when we purchase our next toaster during the Columbus Day Blowout Sale at Sears.

From Letter.., Christopher Columbus

Sanne Bergh
Eng48A
Journal for Columbus
Dec. 6, 2011

Author Quote
"To the first island which I found I gave the name San Salvador, in remembrance of the Divine Majesty, Who has marvelously bestowed all this; the Indians call it 'Guanahani.' To the second I gave the name Isla de Santa Maria de Concepcion; to the third, Fernandina; to the fourth, Isabella; to the fifth, Isla Juana, and so to each one I gave a new name (32)".

Internet Quote
Columbus called the island (in what is now The Bahamas) San Salvador; the natives called Guanahani. Exactly which island in the Bahamas this corresponds to is an unresolved topic; prime candidates are Samana Cay, Plana Cays, or San Salvador Island (so named in 1925 in the belief that it was Columbus's San Salvador). The indigenous people he encountered, the Lucayan, Taíno or Arawak, were peaceful and friendly.

Brief Summary
Essentially, Columbus landed on an island and "conquered" it, therefore making it Spanish territory. He gave it a name, despite the fact that it already had a name. He brought the indigenous people back with him to Spain, with hopes of Christianizing them and making them servants.

Response/Ideas
Columbus represents the superiority complex that the Spanish possesses. He acts as a vehicle to symbolize their greed and desire for more and more power. It is understandable to go out to new countries to seek out a land that is different and new, but to rename the entire land and dub it as Spanish is a whole other matter. What essentially makes Europeans more powerful than "indigenous" countries or settlements is their bigger weapons. They had fancier armor, guns and boats and therefore held more precedence. It automatically created a sense of superiority and power over those who may not have possessed such items. For example, had the Indians of Guannahani created mutiny and rebelled against the Spanish, perhaps taking the weapons, would the Spanish become the indentured slaves of the indigenous people? Maybe in the eyes of the Europeans, they would have felt that these "savages" would have eaten them or simply sent them away. It's the very peacefulness and kindness that the Indians had that made the Spanish so quick to take them back with them. The Europeans were too quick to believe that the Indians did not have any intelligence. The true barbarianism lies in the fact that the Europeans went to another land, renamed it, kidnapped the people and called them stupid and faithless. It's also ironic, considering their will was to Christianize them and to give them morals, when the Bible itself could sense some hypocrisy in the entire matter.

Lies my Teacher Told Me: The Truth About Thanksgiving (Ch. 3), Loewen

Sanne Bergh
Eng48A
Journal for Loewen
Dec. 2, 2011

Author Quote
"They chose Plymouth because of its beautiful cleared fields, recently planted corn, and its useful harbor and "brook of fresh water." It was a lovely site for town. Indeed, until the plague, it had been a town, for "New Plimoth" was none other than Squanto's village of Patuxet"

Internet Quote
"Jane Kamensky, a professor of history at Brandeis, asks on the website "Common Place" whether it’s worth while “to plumb the bottom of it all – to determine, for example, ... whether Plymouth’s ‘Pilgrims’ were indeed the grave-robbing hypocrites that UAINE [United American Indians of New England] describes. ... Was the ‘first Thanksgiving’ merely a pretext for bloodshed, enslavement, and displacement that would follow in later decades?"

Brief Summary

Basically the author is saying that history books have lied about what really happened when the pilgrims "settled". They used religion to justify the beauty and food that was already there, and eventually would wipe out all of the Indians. The Indians reached out to help, but instead caught a nasty bug and died. There are many myths about the happiness of Thanksgiving and Loewen writes about the hardships both parties had faced. 

Responses/Reactions/Ideas

It's noted that the "beautiful cleared lands" was "none other than Squanto's village of Patuxet" which interestingly enough, was already populated. I believe the pilgrims had, what one may call, a superiority complex. They thought themselves better and had a close enough mind to believe that the men wandering the lands were "wild" and uncivilized. Squanto himself spoke English and interacted with the pilgrims, and that makes him wild. In all fairness, I believe that the pilgrims were completely selfish. I say this because they isolated themselves and did not allow themselves to seek out different ways of thinking. They refused to adapt, making integration complex. It is even noted that Squanto had a difficult time attempting to convince the pilgrims to bathe. An example of the close mindedness that probably wiped out "96%" of the settler's population. 

When "the plague" wiped out the population, the settlers claimed it was the will of God. There is an inherent lack of logic. It's simply impossible to go to a completely different land and believe in the same principles as one's own native land. For example, it's a little like speaking English in France and getting upset that these natives do not adapt to the English language. The pilgrims refused to adapt and integrate and stuck with European customs, despite the fact that they actually fled Europe. I believe that the pilgrims were acting a tad hypocritical. The pilgrims trampled all over the Indians' land, stealing their food, infecting them with foreign disease and simply acting completely rude. 

Of Plymouth Plantation, William Bradford

Sanne Bergh
Eng48A
Journal for Bradford
Dec. 1, 2011

Author Quote
"But here I cannot but stay and make a pause, and stand half amazed at this poor people's present condition, and so I think will the reader, too, when he well considers the same (115)".

Internet Quote
"Bradford writes most of his history out of his nostalgia, long after the decline of Pilgrim fervor and commitment had become apparent. Both the early annals which express his confidence in the Pilgrim mission and the later annals, some of which reveal his dismay and disappointment, were written at about the same time."

Brief Summary
Bradford talks about how it is to live as a pilgrim and the misgivings and difficulties that were faced. In his books, he justifies the hardships with the will of God and fate. Everything happens for a reason.

Your Ideas/Reactions/Responses to the Author's Ideas
In times when people had nothing or very little, or even in places where people do not own very much, religion plays a large role in the well-being and happiness of the people. Puritan faith was founded because they didn't want to worship God in the same way Europeans did. As a result, pilgrims fled to America to practice religion in ways that they saw fit. In complete isolation, beliefs tend to take on a whole new form. For example, there's a village in the South Pacific that worships a war veteran named John Frum Day. As a cargo cult, the group of people worship someone or something that is completely arbitrary. However, it is for the simple sake of worship that they do believe so strongly in something that might seem ridiculous. People need something to believe in. Compared to Puritans, this village is not so different. However, to look upon the "poor people's condition" is a rendition of the inherent cause of the intensity of the Puritan faith. It is what triggered people's ability to accept and understand why the world was so cruel. From an Atheist point of view, one might think that the land was simply harsh and inhospitable to people's needs and that there is no alternative belief besides geographical conditions. When Bradford "stops to stare" there is an inherent acknowledgement for the poor conditions of the land. People are undoubtedly left with nothing else but their faith. Essentially, isolationism makes people do things that might make people do crazy things.

To My Dear and Loving Husband, Anne Bradstreet

Sanne Bergh
Eng48A
Journal for Bradstreet
Nov. 29, 2011

Author Quote
"If ever wife was happy in a man,
Compare with me, ye woman, if you can.
I prize thy love more than whole mines of gold,
Or all the riches that the East doth hold"

Anne Bradstreet

Internet Quote
Due to her family's position she grew up under privileged circumstances and was a well-educated woman for her time, being tutored in history, several languages and literature.

Brief Summary
Anne Bradstreet was a well-educated woman, who also had eight children and a husband whom she valued greatly. She loves her husband, who also held a high social ranking and could support his wife.

Reaction/Response
Anne Bradstreet is an extraordinary author because she was one of the first female poets in the New World and Europe. I find it ironic that a woman who should be able to support herself, relies so heavily on a man. However, to be married and to have children is the social custom and she would probably be dubbed a witch or a sinner if she were to actually support herself. Although, it is important to point out that her self-reliance is completely possible. In Frederick Douglass' autobiography, it is noted that it is dangerous to teach a slave to read. For women, who have also faced social injustices, I find it amazing that a female Puritan in the New World would be highly educated. Although, women are similar to slaves because they have kept their mouths shut for a long time when it comes to their rights. It seems as though Anne Bradstreet was setting the stage for future feminists who would later use her life as an example. The example being that women can truly "have it all". For example, Bradstreet had an education, a successful writing career as well as eight children, and apparently a loving husband. Alternatively, perhaps the poem could be an example of satire. It seems that she is heavily weighing in on the idea of her husband being grand and amazing. Perhaps she is purposely being ironic. To compare oneself to her husband, and stating that she is not worth a man's value, is part of the Puritan's patriarchal structured beliefs. However, it is obvious with her inherent education and capability that she has equal, if not more, value. I personally believe that Bradstreet was quietly pushing for female rights and that her poetry was a form of satirical emotional expression.

Sinners in the Hands of an Angry God, Jonathan Edwards

Sanne Bergh
Eng48A
Journal for Edwards
Nov. 22, 2011

Author Quote
"Then they shall be left to fall, as they are inclined by their own weight. God will not hold them up in these slippery places any longer, but will let them go; and then, at that very instant, they shall fall into destruction; as he that stands on such slippery declining ground, on the edge of a pit, he cannot stand alone, when he is let go he immediately falls and is lost (426)".

Internet Quote
"Edwards hoped that the imagery and message of his sermon would awaken his audience to the horrific reality that awaited them should they continue without Christ. The underlying point is that God has given humanity a chance to rectify their sins. Edwards says that it is the will of God that keeps wicked men from the depths of Hell. This act of restraint has given humanity a chance to mend their ways and return to Christ"

Brief Summary
Edwards wanted to warn potential sinners of the possible torments of hell. He wanted to actualize God's wrath and scared people out of sinning. He essentially stated that if an individual were to reject God, they would burn in Hell and would not enjoy it, to say in the least.

Reaction/Response
My first reaction, being 100% Atheist and Liberal, is that Edwards is borderline crazy. It's almost as if he was setting the stage for all the religious nuts who isolate themselves in the Bible Belt. However, that is a personal bias. Yet, I believe that his approach to preaching is extremely effective. He is preaching in a manner that people use today; the "fear-factor". He's scaring people by telling them if they do anything God says is wrong, they would suffer. However, I believe when he uses the word "slippery" he's saying that anyone could sin. It could come knocking on the door at any moment and there's no escaping. Although, an individual could "slip" without their consent. For example, a person would slip on a banana peel. What if a sinner were to sin, without their knowing? Would they go to Hell and suffer through all of this torment that Edwards so vividly describes? He is saying that there is no leeway and that God will punish, and it will not be pleasant. It seems a bit harsh to me. Specifically being "inclined with their own weight" suggests that every person is responsible for their own actions and that no person can avoid the wrath of Satan. Although, sin isn't always in the hands of an individual and the concept of sin is ambiguous. Additionally, the fear-factor that Edwards uses seems to be a cop-out in the attempt to convert people to Christianity. The sermon was used to enlighten people and to promote the word of God. The negative definitely out shined the positive. People essentially avoided sin to avoid Hell. What about Heaven and all of it's glory?

Jefferson's Blood, PBS Documentary

Sanne Bergh
Eng48A
Journal for "Jefferson's Blood Documentary"
Nov. 22, 2011

Author Quote
"Almost from the beginning he has been a symbol, a touchstone, of what we as a people are--someone invented, manipulated, turned into something we Americans like or dislike, fear or yearn for, within ourselves."

Internet Quote
"Now, the new scientific evidence has been correlated with the existing documentary record, and a consensus of historians and other experts who have examined the issue agree that the question has largely been answered: Thomas Jefferson fathered at least one of Sally Hemings's children, and quite probably all six. The language of "proof" does not translate perfectly from science and the law to the historian's craft, however. And the DNA findings in this case are only one piece of a complicated puzzle that many in previous generations worked hard to make sure we might never solve".

Brief Summary
The Thomas Jefferson and Sally Hemings affair brought about much controversy because of the customs of the 18th century. Thomas Jefferson was not able to give Sally Hemings affection the same way he were to give a white woman. The emphasis lays truly in the inconsistency and contradiction in Jefferson's character.

Reaction/Response
It is interesting that Sally Hemings' children were considered black under Virgina law. The affair almost represents a shame that embodies the entire humanity of the white man. We bring Africans over, we force them to work, we give them little rights, and father children that we do not claim as our own. They were not humanized to people like Thomas Jefferson; a man who claims all men are created equal, even after he has fathered six mixed-race children. Although, perhaps to Jefferson, the affair with Sally Hemings could have been an experiment. Perhaps he was simply attesting the notion that "all men are created equal" and was testing law with his slave children. The children were almost completely white, and maybe Jefferson wanted to simply see what would happen. Although cruel and unsupported, maybe in Jefferson's mind he thought he was creating a more equal nation by going against the status quo and indulging in his "African Vixon". Thomas Jefferson was supposed to be a progressive man who was ahead of his times. It's terrible that he was forced to live by the customs of the 18th century and was "forced" to segregate his slaves. However, I find it weak and small-minded of him to do so due to the fact that he was actually exposed to a slave-free nation that fostered progressive thinking and behavior (Paris, France). As a Southern aristocrat and a man who should have actually lived by the principles that he preached, he did not practice the art of moral value. The Hemings' family identity brought about a great burden because the children struggled with the idea of "choosing" a race.There was no identity for mixed race in a time when you have "one drop" of African blood, you were automatically African.

Thomas Jefferson, The Autobiography

Sanne Bergh
Eng48A
Journal for Jefferson
Nov. 17, 2011

Author Quote
"In every stage of these oppressions we have petitioned for redress in the most humble terms: our repeated petitions have been answered only repeated injuries (655)".

Internet Quote
"The Declaration would eventually become Jefferson's major claim to fame, and his eloquent preamble became an enduring statement of human rights".

Brief Summary
Thomas Jefferson was essentially a founding father because he fought for basic human rights for Americans. The Declaration of Independence basically declared America's independence and triggered the American Revolution. Americans were claiming what they believed to be their freedom.

Reactions to what the Author is Saying
I think that it is ironic that Thomas Jefferson claims to fight for freedom and states that "every man is created equal" when he isn't actually referring to everyone. He is only referring to every white, rich landowner while excluding women, peasants, illiterates, people of color, ect. It's understandable that the people of the 18th century society were meant to think this way, but for a man who is fighting for a progressive movement, it should be expected he's talking about more than a small percentage of the nation's population. The "repeated injuries" that Jefferson refers to "under the most humble of terms" are definitely humble because he's not really talking about the freedom of very many people. In reality, Jefferson is not asking for his human rights. It's hypocritical to say that the British monarchy is affecting Jefferson in manners that are unjust when he is doing the same thing by holding similar prejudices towards his own "inferiors". The man had illegitimate black children with one of his very own slaves, Sally Hemings. The Declaration of Independence was a tiny step towards what America would one day become, a prejudice and an anti-progressive society that lives in the past. For example, the Constitution has been written years and years ago, yet we continue to refer to it as if it still didn't cater to rich, white male landowners. That's why we're fighting for our rights today with the Occupy Wall Street movement.  It might come of as harsh to say that Jefferson's intents were selfish and self-beneficial, but that might be all of which he knew. England was self-catering in that it would extract riches out of the US and it might be considered that the nation served as a bastardized model for what America might one day want to become.

Common Sense, Thomas Paine

Sanne Bergh
Eng48A
Journal for Paine
Nov. 15, 2011


Author Quote
"Alas! we have been long led away by ancient prejudices and made large sacrifices to superstition. We have boasted the protection of Great Britain without considering that her motive was interest not attachment (632)".

Internet Quote
"Paine wrote and reasoned in a style that common people understood; forgoing the philosophy and Latin references used by Enlightenment era writers, Paine structured Common Sense like a sermon and relied on Biblical references to make his case to the people. He connected independence with common dissenting Protestant beliefs as a means to present a distinctly American political identity."

Brief Summary
In light of the American Revolution, people were beginning to think about issues differently. In a land that was founded by Puritans, religion no longer held extreme precedence over other matters and it was now the time to begin thinking about matters logically and sensibly. Britain reaped many benefits by manipulating the ways America was governed. America was helpless and was still run under the ancient British monarchy. Paine essentially argued that this should be changed.          

Your Idea/Reactions/Responses to the Author's Ideas
Thomas Paine makes a valid argument considering the fact that America is vastly different from Britain. Paine states that the American people should no longer be a part of a ruling system that is silly and unjust and that the time has come to expect and reflect upon an impending period of time that is enlightening and refreshing. The "sacrifices to superstition" refer to the delay in which America has been avoiding change. The delay is essentially fear in acknowledging the desire to break free. The fear is caused by the "prejudices" and preconceived notions that nothing would ever be transformed and the governmental system would always remain to be oppressive. America, like a child, looks to its mother for aid and help. Yet, it yields no aid and simply abuses it. Paine states that America is now grown and has matured enough to govern oneself. The only way to break free from the chains of monarchy and a tyrant rule is through rebellion. America is like a child that is malnourished from the true fruits of prosperity and success; it's true potential is being suppressed by the hard hammer and rule of Britain. The "interest" Paine refers to are the benefits Britain reaps through the denial of America’s independence. The idea that Britain founded America upon the principles of humanity and "attachment" have long since vanished, or have perhaps never existed. The "interest" simply holds precedence over what is basically "common sense". England's interest in economic status and financial security has fogged the idea of morality and what is right and just.

An Indian's Looking-Glass for the White Man, William Apess

Sanne Bergh
Eng48A
Journal for Apess
Nov. 3, 2011


Author Quote
 "What then is the matter now? Is not religion the same now under a colored skin as it ever was? If so, I would ask, why is not a man of color respected"(1055)?

William Apess

Internet Quote
"I felt convinced that Christ died for all mankind – that age, sect, color, country, or situation make no difference. I felt an assurance that I was included in the plan of redemption with all my brethren." – A Son of the Forest

Jesus Christ

Brief Summary
To say that God "loves everybody" is false. Apess cites passages from the Bible that state God is, in fact, a bit of a racist. Christianity caters to the white man and Apess even directly states that "the white man, being one in fifteen or sixteen, are the only beloved images of God"(1054).

Your Idea/Reactions/Responses to the Author's Ideas
Religion is one of many ways one is able to console oneself and find reason within the world and why everything works the way it works. Apess, a Native-American preacher, must have found it incredibly difficult to live in a society that condemns any "inferior race" when he is trying to live under the principles of God. Its merely hypocritical of the religion to have a way of understanding that gives way to the heart, yet limits the accessibility to those who are of different color. It's aesthetic and "skin-deep" (1057). Apess makes a bold statement allocating the differences between Christians. It is confusing to understand why Native-Americans are exemplified from fair treatment because of the color of their skin, the way they behave, or that they are simply different. The white men of America who live by the daily principles of Christianity neglect to give Native-Americans respect and treat them like third-class citizens, if citizens at all. It's ironic that they would believe to find themselves in heaven when, by the Holy Book, they do not belong there.

Resistance to Civil Government, Henry David Thoreau

Sanne Bergh
Eng48A
Journal for Thoreau
Oct. 27, 2011

Author Quote
"How does it become a man to behave toward this American government today? I answer that he cannot without disgrace be associated with it. I cannot for an instant recognize that political organization as my government which is the slave's government too (1859)".

Henry David Thoreau

Internet Quote
"Civil disobedience is the active, professed refusal to obey certain laws, demands, and commands of a government, or of an occupying international power."

Brief Summary of what the Author is Saying
 Thoreau is protesting slavery and discusses his disgust in humanity because they are allowing the government to participate in the inhumane act of slavery. He believes the government is corrupt and the people must do something to change it.

Your Idea/Reactions/Responses to the Author's Ideas
As a liberal living in the San Francisco Bay Area, I strongly agree with Thoreau's ideas about the government. We still live in a system that caters to the white, male and rich man who owns unnecessarily large amounts of property. Only in 2008 America was able to swallow its racial digressions and elect a black president. Only in the 1960's America passed the Civil Rights' Movement. This country has prejudices that I personally believe are due to the government's lack of action. The south was obsessed with keeping their customs exactly the same and thus rebelled against the North's more progressive desires to abolish slavery. This also has to do with the fact that they were profiting from slavery, and paid labor was significantly more expensive. Then we went into this long, tedious battle that was initiated partly due to ignorance and a disregard for acceptance of change. Humanity was not a concern when the labor was just so cheap and the economically stable thing to do. America's government has always had the tendency to lean towards the decision that will make them more money. The statement that "the best government that governs least" could come across as borderline anarchist. It is the corruption of the politicians who do nothing that cause the problems. For example, Virginia didn't pass an act that made human sterilization illegal until 1976. This is nearly 35 years ago! When it comes to the question of humanity, America is insensitive. The government chooses the profitable answer, always. There is no morality.

Self-Reliance, Emerson

Sanne Bergh
Eng48A
Journal for Emerson
Oct. 24, 2011

Author Quote
"I appeal from your customs. I must be myself. I cannot break myself any longer for you, or you. If you can love me for what I am, we shall be happier. If you cannot, I will still seek to deserve that you should. I must be myself (1174)".

Internet Quote
"Be yourself; no base imitator of another, but your best self. There is something which you can do better than another. Listen to the inward voice and bravely obey that. Do the things at which you are great, not what you were never made for." --Ralph Waldo Emerson

Brief Summary
To be a conformist is to adapt to a lifestyle and a belief system that does not fit the ideals of the individual. Emerson believes that to be untrue to oneself is the greatest crime, meaning that the particular individual lives by a philosophy that may not be conducive to their feelings or freewill.

Your Idea/Reactions/Responses to the Author's Ideas
Everyone single person in the world knows their beliefs and ideals, the ones that they were raised and born on, which they may or may not live by. These ideals may include religion, prejudices or a lifestyle choice. To be completely independent of the any belief system or a way of thinking, one must completely isolate oneself and separate themselves from society. It would take a soul, body and mind in isolation to brew up a true opinion of oneself and what ideals and style of truth that they find or desire in the world surrounding them. Not everybody in the world is brave enough to break away from conformity. Religion can be consoling to those who seek answers to the universe's difficult and hard-to-face questions. It is when an individual accepts the fact there may be no answers and only a long series of questions and problems that simply take a certain way of thinking. I believe Emerson argues that these questions are never answered, they are addressed in a manner that reflect an attitude to the situation. For example, he states that he "must be himself" and that he cannot adapt to the ways of other belief systems because he simply doesn't believe them. It is almost a form of alienation, but if it brings essential happiness it is an inarguable ideal of life. However, what is happiness? Is it a radiance that reflects intense joy as a result of "positive thoughts"? It's ambiguous, but so is the idea conformity.

Incidents in the Life of a Slave Girl, Harriet Jacobs

Sanne Bergh
Eng48A
Journal for Jacobs
Oct. 20, 2011

Author Quote
"With me the lamp of hope had gone out. The dream of my girlhood was over. I felt lonely and desolate" (1815).

Internet Quote
"Death is better than slavery." -- Harriet Jacobs

Brief Summary
A slave struggles and agonizes with the concept of being considered a piece of property as opposed to a human being. Humanity is one of the ideas that are associated with being a free individual. Slavery chains both the spirit and the body. The author's girlhood is connoted with innocence, with the idea and hope that anything is possible-- with slavery, everything that is associated with happiness has vanished.

Your Idea/Reactions/Responses to the Author's Ideas
Jacobs depicts a life that cannot be fictionalized. Even thought the main character's name is Linda, it appears to be a pseudonym. The protagonist is forced to be desensitized to the pleasures of love, affection and any human emotion. It seems she is not allowed to feel these things. When she was a child, her parents exposed her to the possibilities of life beyond the chains of slavery. They had her understand the pleasures of humanity, literacy and love in her early childhood. Everything was then snatched from her when she was sold and purchased as a piece of merchandise. Despite this, she was not broken and continued to pursue freedom. To be a slave, in my opinion, takes a great deal of psychological power. To go on with a broken spirit is the same as being emotionally dead. I believe that with Linda's rebellious spirit, it took tremendous amounts strength to endure the amount of physical and emotional abuse that she had received. Additionally, the fact that she is a woman and has opinions that are completely disregarded and ignored makes the story that much more traumatic. She is forced into situations that no one could dream of. The black woman of the 19th century were some of the most tortured beings in American history. Women had no rights, blacks had no rights, Jacobs had no rights. With no rights, there is no humanity, there is no say, there is nothing. Jacobs had been degenerated into a mere physical object that was used as a material tool. In her case, sensitivity was a luxury.

The Philosophy of Composition, Edgar Allan Poe

Sanne Bergh
Eng48A
Journal for Poe
Oct. 14, 2011

Author Quote
 "Most writers [would].. positively shudder at letting the public take a peep behind the scenes... at the fully matured fancies discarded in despair... at the cautious selections and rejections" (1618).

Internet Quote

"If a writer knows enough about what he is writing about, he may omit things that he knows. The dignity of movement of an iceberg is due to only one ninth of it being above water."  
--Ernest Hemingway

Brief Summary
A writer has his or her own way of composing their own piece of work, and to dissect the process would be similar to retracing your steps back to ten years ago. In Poe's essay he dismisses the idea that to write well, one must write intuitively. It has method and analytical technique, and that is what creates a successful piece.

 

Your Idea/Reactions/Responses to the Author's Ideas
Poe describes his ideas on ways to write well, yet he does not really explain how to write well. He states that a good piece must have an "under-current" of meaning, yet I don't believe this word aligns very well with the ideas of length, method and "unity of effect". Under-current, from what I understand, is a hidden meaning, or a way a reader can understand the story for themselves. However, Poe himself spent much of his life as a "hoax writer" making money writing magazine articles or as a critic. I believe the essay is a step-by-step process for which Poe, himself, wants to write. There are the methods in which he says he puts into his poem, The Raven. Yet, I believe that these devices do, indeed, use intuition as a supplement. How does one come up with "originality" or "suggestiveness" without using the core of one's own intuition? However, Poe's writing does seem to be influenced by his life events and what he does know. For instance, his life has been traumatic and he has have events in his life that have marred his ability to comprehend things similarly to "normal people". These issues have obviously influenced his writing in ways both good and bad, but it contradicts his essay. Poe's own writing, has indeed, been changed by his intuition and instinct. 

The Minister's Black Veil, Nathaniel Hawthrone

Sanne Bergh

Eng48A

Journal for Hawthrone

Oct. 11, 2011

Author Quote
"But, even amid his grief, Mr. Hopper smiled to thinking that only a material emblem had separated him from happiness, though the horrors which it shadowed forth, must be drawn darkly between the fondest of lovers" (1317).

Internet Quote
"While the veil is the main symbol in the story, it is also ironic. Hooper in his stubborn use of the veil parable of one sin makes him unconsciously guilty of a greater one; that of egotistically warping the total meaning of life".

Brief Summary of What the Author is Saying
Mr. Hopper uses the black veil as a symbol for his sin, however, he is affecting others negatively with his disconcerting appearance. He believes that the veil is merely a way to punish himself, but it affecting others more than he believes or originally intended. His fiancee leaves him because of the veil, and he doesn't really appear to understand the drastic action because he is wallowing in his own self-pity, so to speak.

Your Idea/Reactions/Responses to the Author's Ideas
A black veil as a tool for self-punishment is an interesting choice because it shows that he is trying to punish himself, but it isn't just a punishment to Mr. Hopper alone. The face isn't to be seen, because Mr. Hopper believes it doesn't deserve to be seen. When a person is looking at someone and they can't see their face, in some cultures, it could be considered fairly rude. For instance, in America, it is polite to take off one's hat so the face can be seen. Of course, in the Middle East women are to wear burquas over their face to hide their beauty, an Afghan woman says she wears it to "save men from themselves.. thoughts are sin in themselves." Likewise, perhaps Mr. Hopper believes that the mere image of his face could perpetuate sin. Others would see the guilt on his face and speak no more of him. It is interesting and ironic that he is a clergyman, because he is supposedly a symbol for everything that is not sin. It is understandable that he would want to acknowledge his wrong-doings whole-heartedly, but it does seem to be in a bit of excess. There is also the act of living a life in penance, and the daily flagellantism as they did in the Catholic Church. However, it just seems very contradictory towards both Christianity and Catholicism, because it is about forgiveness, and Mr. Hopper just can't seem to do that. 

Lies: The Land of Opportunity (Ch.7)

Sanne Bergh
Eng48A
Journal for "Lies my Teacher Told Me"
Oct. 7, 2011


Author Quote
"Since history textbooks present the American past as four hundred years of progress and portray our society as a land of opportunity in which folks get what they deserve and deserve what they get, the failures of working-class Americans to transcend their class origin inevitably get laid at their own doorsteps".

Internet Quote
"For a variety of reasons to be here explored, inequality in the United States has increased to the extent that the gap between the rich and poor is larger now than at time since 1928--greater than that of any industrialized nation"(http://www.trinity.edu/mkearl/strat.html). 

Brief Summary of What the Author is Saying
There is a quote at the beginning of the chapter that states "Ten men in our country could buy the whole world and ten million can't buy enough to eat". The socioeconomic gap between the people of the American population is bigger than our current textbooks make it out to be. In the 1950s, America was the land of opportunity and possibility but this idea has quickly transformed into anything but a dream. There are people who are living paycheck to paycheck, who cannot afford to advance their lives and who are stuck in a cycle.

Your Idea/Reactions/Responses to the Author's Ideas
The textbooks may not provide sufficient evidence as to the current social structure of our country, but I believe that is has to be some teachers duties to inform students of the current conditions while they are getting their educations. Students are apart of vicious cycle in which they cannot escape their socioeconomic status, and if so, this happens rarely. Kindergartners everywhere are being duped when they are told that they can one day become president. In the last month, there was a protest in New York that was protesting the economical inequality in this country. Students are obtaining Bachelor degrees only to find themselves unemployed and up to their shoulders in debt. People are unable to retire because they cannot afford to. Opportunities for improvement have shrank to a small size. Poverty is more real than ever in today's time, and our government is blaming the people for not pushing themselves harder. How hard is the population supposed to work to retain their sanity and financial well-being? The American dream is an illusion. On the other side of the spectrum, we see people who work in the entertainment business, i.e. Angelina Jolie, Brad Pitt, making millions. We read in People Magazine that these people just bought another villa in the South of France, or their sixteenth Porche. There is an obvious disproportion in wealth throughout the United States, as the poor pay more taxes than the rich. Not only are they rubbing their wealth in everybody's faces, but it is simply unfair. Why do some people work seventy hour weeks with no vacation and Jennifer Aniston goes on eight vacations a year? We need equality.