Nelson Mandela's Long Walk To Freedom

Nelson Mandela is arguably the most inspirational leader of our time encompassing a moral philosophy of inequality that saw him win the hearts of not just the people of South Africa but also the world receiving the Nobel Peace Prize in 1993. But it is not just his political accomplishments in talking with the enemy since his release from 27 years imprisonment under an apartheid system that make him the revered martyr that he is today. 'The struggle is my life' he reiterated. From the rolling hills of the Transkei valley of his youth where he experienced a mixture of wealth and poverty to growing hungry in Johannesburg working as a law attorney before being inspired to become a freedom fighter and begin his long walk to freedom. His life was a rollercoaster of ups and downs taking unexpected turns at the worst of times but even though his life was a bumpy ride, his mindset remained steady, his eyes fixed on the prospect of freedom, always looking forward. His experiences were the forces that shaped and moulded him into the leader that he is. In the following review of his autobiography, I will explore the different aspects of his psyche that made him the father of a nation free from oppression and apartheid.

   His leadership styles always respected the collective. He never wanted to seem like he was dictating any decision no matter how small for he was adamant in establishing a society governed by a democracy of equality and never wanted to reflect the ideals of the enemy who had suppressed him all his life: “For to be free is not merely to cast off one's chains, but to live in a way that respects and enhances the freedom of others” (Mandela, p 751). Mandela refers to prison as a crucible that tests a man's character: “Some men, under the pressure of incarceration, showed true mettle, while others revealed themselves as less than what they had appearded to be” (Mandela p 539). He goes on to mention the dramas they were allowed perform in the later years at Robben Island. One such drama became ingrained in his memory as a symbol of South Africa's struggle. Mandela plays the role of a King Creon who appears to be sincere and patriotic suggesting that experience is the foundation of leadership and that obligations to the people take precedence over loyalty to an individual but he deals mercilessly with his enemies who rebelled against the city declaring that the main character Antigone's brother does not deserve a proper burial (Mandela p 541). This is symbollic of the laws of oppression that were weighed on Africans more heavily after defiance campaigns and protest demonstrations including gatherings and stay at homes.

   Mandela states that a leader must temper justice with mercy. Even though he plays the role of the King in the play, I feel as though he is a real life version of Antigone: “It was Antigone who symbolized our struggle; she was, in her own way, a freedom fighter, for she defied the law on the ground that it was unjust” (Mandela p 541). Mandela was courageous in the face of oppression never letting the prison authorities dampen his spirit by harassing his wife or cutting off most prison privileges even though he was a political prisoner. He took the moral high ground disarming the prejudiced warders with words and threats of legal action. The plays were a reflection of the difficulties he faced: “What I took out of them was that character was measured by facing up to difficult situations and that a hero was a man who would not break down even under the most trying circumstances” (Mandela p 540). Nelson Mandela certainly is one of those heroes.

   He took solace in the company of his comrades and considered them all his equals striving never to undermine them when speaking for any of his groups whether it was the African National Congress, Umkhonto we Sizwe, or the State of South Africa. In developing his leadership styles he took inspiration from such works as Tolstoy’s War and Peace: “Kutuzov defeated Napoleon precisely because he was not swayed by the ephemeral and superficial values of the court, and made his decisions on a visceral understanding of his men and his people. It reminded me once again that truly to lead one’s people one must also truly know them” (Mandela p 585). He demonstrated this after his release by voluntarily living in the poor district of Soweto which was known for having dire conditions and no running water. He could have well afforded a more comfortable lodging.

   Mandela has a wealth of experience in the management of individuals and groups. That is one of the vital ingredients that led to his inauguration as President of South Africa. After his father lost his place in office Mandela was adopted to a family of Thembu tradition in order to be educated as an advisor to the King of the region. He was groomed from his early years to be involved in decision making matters becoming a prefect in college as well as being a member of the student representative council. He did not want to be confined to ways of Thembu tradition and ran away to Johannesburg to practise as an attorney and soon established the first black law firm in South Africa: “I had to make my way on the basis of my ability, not my heritage” (Mandela p 39). This is an integral part of his belief that everyone should be awarded on the basis of ability after receiving free education in a system of equality.

   Before he even got involved with the ANC or was in any way fighting for freedom, he was already well established in dealing with individuals and groups through his law firm and other previous intellectual exploits. He resigned from the student representative committee on the basis that their demands were not met such as improvements to the diet. The principle presented him with a dilemma where he would either return to the committee or be expelled. He stood his ground. This was evidence from a young age that Mandela was not going to bow down to a dictatorship of any kind: “Something inside me would not let me. While I appreciated Dr Kerr’s position and his willingness to give me another chance, I resented his absolute power over my fate” (Mandela p 62)

   Mandela was a great manager of groups in organising defiance campaigns and raising awareness of the rights the ANC was fighting for. But he like any other leader was faced with internal conflicts. One such conflict happened in jail with one of his comrades Tefu. It was just a small incident but a great example of Mandela’s problem solving skills and absolute humility and humanitarian attributes that recognise him as a true leader of the people. He had established dealings with a sympathetic warder who supplied them with sandwiches and tobacco but the warder was adamant he would only deal with Mandela. Tefu became rash, suspicious that his portion of tobacco was not equal and demanded the warder to give him his tobacco directly. Mandela swiftly shooed Tefu and persuaded the warder to relax. Mandela punished Tefu for almost compromising their supplies by not allowing him tobacco or sandwiches that night. Tefu woke Mandela later pleading that he had suffered for his commitment to the people and now Mandela as his leader in jail was punishing him like this. Mandela felt he had abused his power to a fellow comrade and immediately gave Tefu his sandwich and half the tobacco: “Tefu was always difficult, but from that point on he behaved much better” (Mandela p 412).

   As a politician working with stakeholders can prove a difficult task within your own organisation as well as that of the opposition. Mandela was regularly engaged in long debates with his colleagues about ANC policies and about the pros and cons of certain decisions. But he had enormous respect for his colleagues and they would nearly always come to an agreement of some sort. He would never pursue a proposal if he did not get the approval of the group. Sometimes this hindered opportunities to begin talks of peace and freedom with the government but eventually Mandela was put in what he referred to as a splendid isolation. He knew the ANC was a collective but the government had made collectivity impossible. Mandela felt it was time to sit down with the enemy but knew his colleagues in jail would condemn his proposal, killing his initiative: “There are times when a leader must move out ahead of the flock, go off in a new direction, confident that he is leading his people the right way ..... my isolation furnished my organisation with an excuse in case matters went awry: the old man was alone and completely cut off, and his actions were taken by him as an individual, not a representative of the ANC” (Mandela p 627).

   Once he had commenced talks with the National Party, they expressed concerns repeatedly about the ANC’s affiliation with the Communist Party maintaining that the ANC was dominated by communists. Mandela always stood his ground and was resolute in all his responses to attacks by the National Party explaining that the ANC and Communist Party were separate organisations who shared short-term objectives like the overthrow of racial oppression and the birth of a non-racial South Africa, but that their long-term interests were not the same. His responses seemed to be falling on deaf ears and he exclaimed in exasperation: “There are four of you and only one of me, and you cannot control me or get me to change my mind. What makes you think the communists can succeed where you have failed?” (Mandela p 642). The National Party expressed concerns as to how the ANC could protect the rights of the white minority in a majority rule. Mandela stated that no organisation in the history of South Africa compares to the ANC in terms of trying to unite all the people and races of South Africa, referring them to the preamble of the Freedom Charter: “South Africa belongs to all who live in it, black and white. I told them that whites were Africans as well, and that in any future dispensation the majority would need the minority” (Mandela p 643).

   Mandela derived motivation from the prospect that one day he would be free. He reminded himself that he was more a representative of the people than his own man. The priorities of the individual had to be set aside. He did not regard himself as superior to any South African but he knew that he was regarded as a symbol of justice and freedom to his people. He delighted them by such actions as that of the Rivonia trial: “I had chosen traditional dress to emphasize the symbolism that I was a black African walking into a white man’s court. I was literally carrying on my back the history, culture and heritage of my people” (Mandela p 385). He took great pride in his role that day and it motivated him to endure the forces of oppression as he continued his battle against those forces: “I felt myself to be the embodiment of African nationalism, the inheritor of Africa’s difficult but noble past and her uncertain future” (Mandela p 385).

   It was the simple things of everyday life that he missed as well as his family. It was his yearning of these things that made him strive all the more for his freedom. He said in a letter to his wife: “I’ve been away from you for so long that the very first thing I would like to do on my return would be to take you away from that suffocating atmosphere, drive you along carefully, so that you could have the opportunity of breathing fresh and clean air, seeing the beauty spots of South Africa, its green grass and trees, colourful wild flowers, sparkling streams, animals grazing in the veld and be able to talk to the simple people we meet along the road” (Mandela p 592). He is sad that his political career has dictated his life leading him away from his family. He saw his prison garden as a metaphor for certain aspects of his life. He wrote to his wife Winnie about a beautiful tomato plant that he coaxed to a robust plant producing deep red fruits but it began to wither and decline and there was nothing he could do to bring it back to health: “I did not want our relationship to go the way of that plant, and yet I felt that I had been unable to nourish many of the most important relationships in my life. Sometimes there is nothing one can do to save something that must die” (Mandela p 582).

   Throughout his years in prison his wife Winnie had been a constant moral support, lover, and comrade. She supported him wholeheartedly in his struggle and understood the implications it had on their relationship. In 1992 after his release from prison Mandela announced his separation from his wife due to dictated circumstances stating that they came to a mutual agreement that it would be best for the ANC and them personally to part: “Comrade Nomzamo and myself contracted our marriage at a critical time in the struggle for liberation in our country. Owing to the pressures of our shared commitment to the ANC and the struggle to end apartheid, we were unable to enjoy a normal family life ..... My love for her remains undiminished” (Mandela p 718-719).

   Mandela was proficient in his capability of using his position as a political prisoner and martyr of the people to negotiate terms with the government. The government offered him freedom if he ‘unconditionally rejected violence as a political instrument’. The offer had been presented by the state president himself who stated: “It is therefore not the South African government which now stands in the way of Mr Mandela’s freedom. It is he himself” (Mandela p 620-621). It was a ploy by the government to decrease international awareness of the situation in South Africa but Mandela knew it was not real freedom being offered and wrote a response that was read publicly by his daughter Zindzi. She concluded his response with: “Only free men can negotiate. Prisoners cannot enter into contracts... I cannot and will not give any undertaking at a time when I and you, the people, are not free. Your freedom and mine cannot be separated. I will return” (Mandela p 623). Well able to respond to the government’s devious tactics he succeeded in bringing the negotiations to a new level scheduling the first face-to-face meeting between the ANC and the government in March 1990. However there was on-going violence especially in Natal where 230 people lost their lives: “In Natal, Zulu was murdering Zulu, for Inkatha members and ANC partisans are Zulus” (Mandela p 689). It was strongly believed that the police were inciting violence by providing weapons to the Inkatha to undermine progress by the ANC. The government claimed to know nothing about it but Mandela responded to great affect: “I announced the suspension of our talks and warned Mr de Klerk that he could not ‘talk about negotiations on the one hand and murder our people on the other’” (Mandela p 691).

   His expert communication skills allowed him to mount enormous pressure of all sorts on the National party forcing progress in negotiations. He exploited the media as an efficient communication tool to portray the difficulties of the struggle. He made and maintained contact with political leaders all over the world and even did a tour visiting many Countries including Ireland. On his trip he met with leaders such as Margaret Thatcher and George W. Bush. These powerful people now had their sights on South Africa. It was only a matter of time before Mandela achieved the freedom he sought for all his life. No political party wants to be seen in a negative light on the international stage. There would be some consolation for the National party to be seen as the party that dismantled the apartheid system. And they were recognized for this with Mr de Klerk receiving the Noble Peace prize with Mandela in 1993.

   Mandela was always able to keep in contact with the ANC and all the stakeholders concerned with South Africa’s welfare. In prison he devised ways of getting messages out to the ANC who would deliver them to the media. In his speeches he always reminded people that he was not a messiah, but an ordinary man who had become a leader because of extraordinary circumstances. In his speech after his release from prison after nearly three decades he stood before his people in servitude and said: “Friends, comrades and fellow South Africans. I greet you all in the name of peace, democracy and freedom for all! I stand here before you not as a prophet but as a humble servant of you, the people. Your tireless and heroic sacrifices have made it possible for me to be here today. I therefore place the remaining years of my life in your hands” (Mandela p 676)

Ezra Pound- A Contradiction Justified

Ezra pound’s controversial life (1885-1972) saw him going from an ‘imagist’ perspective to that of ‘vorticism.’ His manifesto is important in evaluating his work as it shows a change in poetic literature that stays relevant to his later works even if they don’t comply with the original guidelines of the manifesto. In the following analysis of Pound’s manifesto and his work, I will explain how his manifesto remained important to poetry and Pound himself.

Ezra Pound

     His early theory of the imagist structure was formed at the turn of the twentieth century. “An ‘image’ is that which presents an intellectual and emotional complex in an instant of time” (Loeffelholz 1506). The best example of Pound’s imagist poems I feel is ‘In a Station of the Metro.’ Here, Pound wishes to translate his perception of beauty in the midst of ugliness into a single image in written form. He does this by linking two metaphors together. The first one: “The apparition of these faces in the crowd” (1482), I feel is the transformation of these faces to something beautiful that mean something instead of just passing obscured objects in a crowded dirty subway. The “[p]etals on a wet, black bough” (1482) seem to represent the beauty of life shining through the dank underground. To me the faces symbolize a purpose and a radiance that is life. They are in the subway now but they are travelling towards something wonderful.

     Many twentieth century poets were influenced by imagism but the fact that even the rules of grammar seemed artificial made this new poetry work in disconnected fragments (1478). Pounds early advice was hard to follow telling readers to “[u]se no superfluous word, no adjective which does not reveal something” (1507). More modern poets may argue that adjectives make poems more enjoyable to read. Pound eventually moved from the bland form of imagism to vorticism which “still espousing direct and bare presentation, sought for some principle of dynamism and energy in the image” (1478). One such poem is ‘Hugh Selwyn Mauberley (Life and Contacts)’ (1484). Pound’s vorticist poems seem to be longer and also seem to have more dynamism and energy: “Quick eyes gone under earth’s lid” (1487). This is very descriptive of a person that died highlighting the person’s energetic clever personality ‘Quick eyes’ now gone beneath the earth’s surface. I like how ‘lid’ is used to describe the passing of life to death as if the earth is closing those eyelids.

Pound giving the fascist salute

     Pound found himself propagandizing against the poetry that made him initially want to be a poet (1477). However he was proud of all his work seeing his old work as an inspiration for new forms of poetry to take hold and seeing his new work as another essential change: “on the one hand, a desire to ‘make it new’; on the other, a deep attachment to the old” (1477). Even through his contrasting perspectives Pound remained controversial throughout his work with his rebellious and colourful personality shocking his audience. He also remained convinced that the United States had no place for him and regarded it as a culturally backward nation.

     Even though Pounds manifesto is outdated even to himself in his later years, it still has relevance in how it brought about change in poetic styles. His amazing ability to downgrade old poems along with those of contemporary poets at the same time annoyed people but they listened nevertheless: “The actual language and phrasing is often as bad as that of our elders without even the excuse that the words are shovelled in to fill a metric pattern or to complete the noise of a rhyme-sound” (1506). At times he referred to certain poets describing works as being “as stale and hackneyed as any pseudo-Swinburnian” (1506). He is talking about Algernon Swinburne (1837-1909) who would have been famous before poetic styles such as imagism and vorticism began to emerge. I think I see what Pound is talking about when I looked at ‘A Ballad of Burdens’ by Algernon Swinburne. In the third line of the third verse he writes “that buy thy white and brown” (Swinburne 6). I feel this has no other purpose than to just rhyme with ‘down’ in the first line. This may have inspired young poets to think more carefully of what they are writing.

     I feel that the majority of Pounds work does not exemplify what he wrote in his manifesto as he changed his perspective from imagism to vorticism. However he was part of a movement at the time his manifesto was published where literature was changing and this may have influenced his opinion. He is open minded knowing that change will always happen and his manifesto may even be subject to change: “All this, however, some may consider open to debate” (Loeffelholz 1507). I think he feels change is good introducing new styles of literature and I think he sees his manifesto as a stepping stone to a transformation of literature which is set to become more complex and diverse than ever before: “But it is, on the whole, good that the field should be ploughed. Perhaps a few good poems have come from the new method, and if so it is justified” (1506).

     In conclusion I think Ezra Pound was looking at the big picture in literature. He saw there was more to literature than the current styles and I feel his manifesto was an early attempt to bring about changes and introduce new styles. It was the idea of change behind his manifesto that made it a great influence at the time and it can still be credited for sparking new styles like that of vorticism which Pound himself took up later on. Pounds controversial life and rebellious attitude saw him bring about change beyond his manifesto and beyond literature but in society itself. When he won the Bollingen Prize for poetry, a tremendous debate commenced on his stature as a poet as well as a citizen. A committee of writers won his release ten years later. He was a patient and prisoner in St. Elizabeth’s hospital for the criminally insane in Washington, D.C. for his involvement with the Italian government broadcasting English-language radio to England and the United States during World War II in which he vilified Jews, President Franklin D. Roosevelt, and American society in general. His release can be seen as a step forward for liberty and freedom of speech.

Works Cited

Loeffelholz, Mary. The Norton Anthology of American Literature. 7th. D. New York: W.W. Norton & Company, 2007. 1477-1507. Print.

Swinburne, Algernon. Algernon Charles Swinburne. PoemHunter.com-The Worlds Poetry Archive, 2004. 6. eBook.

Hills Like White Elephants

Ernest Hemingway is noted as one of the greatest American writers in literature with his original writing style that is unique in its concise intelligent form. Hemingway felt that the reader should be using their imagination when engaged in a text and that they should be able to decipher their own meanings within the words. He felt that the less you give them the more exciting it is for them when they find symbols and hidden messages in the text. He gives the reader basic information from which they can base their own ideas of what the story is about. This method is favored by many readers as they feel more involved in the story. Hemingway uses the iceberg theory to achieve his compressed writing style and his work has been recognized worldwide since. I will look at ‘Hills Like White Elephants’ in my analysis of Hemingway’s writing style and how he incorporates the iceberg theory into his work.

Ernest Hemingway

     Hemingway used the iceberg strategy to allow him to eliminate unnecessary information that could be guessed by the reader without the need for words. He developed “a prose style built from what was left after eliminating all the words one could ‘not stand to hear.’” (Hemingway 1981) In doing this he used dialogue a lot to direct the narration of the story. Through the characters seemingly normal conversation there is rich symbolism hidden within the select few words intelligently chosen by Hemingway: “[t]here is seven-eighths of it under water for every part that shows. Anything you know you can eliminate and it strengthens your iceberg” (Hemingway 538). This method creates a more concise story with quality rather than quantity as Hemingway says a lot in just a few words. These words contain a lot of symbolism as well as what is not included by the author: “It is the part that doesn’t show” (538). This is evident in ‘Hills Like White Elephants’ as Hemingway leaves out the information that it is an abortion the man and the girl are discussing referring to it as “an awfully simple operation” (540). There are many clues in the text that hint to the fact that the story is mainly concerned with abortion. Everything tastes sweet like licorice to the girl suggesting her pregnancy. Even the beer tastes sweet: “Everything tastes of licorice. Especially all the things you’ve waited so long for, like absinthe” (540).

     Although abortion is not mentioned in the text we know it is what the conversation is based on through Hemingway’s use of two literary elements in his application of his iceberg theory which are setting and symbolism (“machete what we’re thinking… ”). The setting is very important as it sets a foreboding atmosphere that allows us to decipher what the girl is thinking. Her observation of “[t]he fields of grain and trees represent fertility and fruitfulness, which symbolize her current pregnant state and the life in her womb” (“machete what we’re thinking… ”) but as she “looked across at the hills on the dry side of the valley” (Hemingway 542), it seems she is looking at what life would be like if she went ahead with the abortion. The land is “barren and sterile, symbolizing her body after the abortion” (“machete what we’re thinking… ”).

     The girl observes that the hills look like white elephants. The symbolism here suggests that she is thinking of her unborn child: “[a]s she observes the white hills she foresees elatedly the birth of her baby – something unique like the uncommon white elephant. The color white symbolizes the innocence and purity of her unborn child” (“machete what we’re thinking… ”). White elephants were considered sacred in Buddhist tradition and so they were seen as both a blessing and a curse if you owned one. The reason being that these animals were said to bring good luck in the long run but as they were sacred they could not be used for labor and were extremely expensive to maintain. This is why the girl is so indecisive about the operation to get an abortion. She sees her unborn child as sacred but feels if she has the child she would sacrifice everything her and her partner had together: “[a]nd if I do it you’ll be happy and things will be like they were and you’ll love me?” (Hemingway 541).

     Hemingway’s use of dialogue to tell the majority of his stories is an effective aspect of his iceberg theory: “‘We want two Anis del Toro.’ ‘With water?’ ‘Do you want it with water?’” (540). Even though it doesn’t specifically state who said what we can easily make out what characters are speaking and this helps to eliminate words which “strengthens your iceberg” (538). The conversations become more fluid in the text and it’s easier to become immersed in the story. This intelligent prose style developed by Hemingway is concise, intelligent and an attractive method to the reader setting the benchmark for many writers since. His “concise way of developing a plot through dialogue ….. attracted many imitators” (538).

     In conclusion I think Hemingway’s writing style incorporating the iceberg theory is an excellent strategy of writing and I feel it’s clear and concise narration his stories gained Hemingway a justified reputation becoming one of America’s most acknowledged writers and globally recognized in the literary canon. His writing style caught on like wildfire rapidly bringing him success and many fans. At the time of his death he was the most well known and studied writer in America. In today’s 21^st century his work is still essential on the literary scene with scholars still learning so much from his simplistic writing style. His stories have “developed a modern, speeded-up, streamlined style that has been endlessly imitated” (Hemingway 1981).

Works Cited

Hemingway, Ernest. Hills Like White Elephants in The Story and Its Writer An Introduction to Short Fiction by Ann Charters. Compact 8th ed. Boston: Bedford/St. Martin's, 2011. 538-542. Print

Hemingway, Ernest. The Norton Anthology American Literature. 7^th. D. New York: W.W. Norton & Company, 2007. 1981. Print.

“Hills Like White Elephants-Literary Analysis.” machete what we’re thinking… . machete Powered by WordPress, 02 Oct 2006. Web. 15 May 2011. <http://www.gummyprint.com/blog/hills-like-white-elephants-literary-analysis/>.

A Rose For Emily

When William Faulkner returned to Oxford, Mississippi after World War I, America was changing dramatically. In reading A Rose for Emily I feel there is a definite connection to the history of the South and the changes it was facing in the aftermath of World War I. America began dealing with its own problems expanding industries in all directions. Cars were introduced on a large scale and were affordable to working class citizens. Wages were higher than ever and technology allowed people to improve their lives being able to travel places they only heard of before. Roads were improved all over with the introduction of cars. Many new businesses opened along these roads and people realized they could now easily live in the country and travel by car to their city jobs. America was improving and expanding at a rapid rate. The North and the South became much more integrated. The South experienced drastic changes and I feel this is expressed in the story through Emily not being able to leave go of the past. I will look at the contrasting interests of the different generations of Jefferson society, how the story relates to the history of the South, and the theme of isolation.

     Miss Emily seems to represent the Old South. She is “considered a ‘monument’ of Southern manners and an ideal of past values” refusing to become a part of new society ("WowEssays.com"). She had been a tradition and a hereditary obligation upon the town since 1894 when Colonel Sartoris remitted her taxes, the same man who “fathered the edict that no Negro woman should appear on the streets without an apron” (Faulkner 409). This shows that she is stuck in the past, a past that suppressed its people. By not being able to let go of the past, it seems she is now the one being suppressed. She is the last of an old Southern family still clinging to the past even when “Colonel Sartoris had been dead almost ten years” (410). With him died the old generation but Miss Emily stubbornly refuses to move on. This is symbolized through her house “lifting its stubborn and coquettish decay above the cotton wagons and the gasoline pumps- an eye-sore among eyesores” (409).

William Faulkner

     Isolation is a prevalent theme in the story. It seems that Emily’s father prevented her from a social education. His “spraddled silhouette in the foreground, his back to her and clutching a horsewhip” (411) is symbolic of how he kept her in isolation: “[w]e remembered all the young men her father had driven away, and we knew that with nothing left, she would have to cling to that which had robbed her” (411). The suppression by her father had kept her in ignorance of a changing society. She knew nothing only the old traditions she was thought by her father. When he died the house was all that was left of the family’s history, a place frozen in time and people were glad as they “believed that the Griersons held themselves a little too high for what they really were” (411). They could finally pity her for becoming humanized: “[n]ow she too would know the old thrill and the old despair of a penny more or less” (411). It’s as if the whole town wants to flush out the old ways and traditions of the South and move on. They see Emily as a hindrance, an obstacle in the way of society’s progress.

     The new generation is adamant with moving forward with social change. A member of the rising generation requests that Miss Emily cleans up her house as it’s causing a smell and a bother to the neighbors but the older men of the board still respect her status from the old generation. The 80 year old mayor, Judge Stevens is stunned at the idea of accusing “a lady to her face of smelling bad” (411), so it is decided to spread lime around her property in secret. The smell dissipated shortly after. It seems that the older men see Miss Emily as representative of the old traditions and values of the South; and even though they’ve accepted social changes themselves, they don’t want to see the new generation bothering this martyr of the old Southern society which has suppressed her to a life of solitude.

     Some interpretations see A Rose for Emily as a conflict between North and South; however, I disagree with this view. I feel Homer Barron is a symbol of the ever growing and expanding America. He symbolizes improving connections between the North and the South becoming well known and liked by everyone in Jefferson: “[p]retty soon he knew everyone in town” (412).  Homer Barron was on the forefront of an ever changing society but Miss Emily was unwilling to let go of the past. It was all she knew. He was her last chance at happiness and escaping a life of isolation so when she realized he would not slow down for her or give her what she wanted, she took it for herself. Finally she could keep a man that her father could not chase away or society could take away.  By killing him he became a rose for Emily that she brooded over: “we saw a long strand of iron-gray hair” (415). I feel that just as this represents an isolated woman desperately clinging to love; it also has a connection to the history of the South at the time.

     It seems that Homer represented the expansion of America after World War I. Construction expanded at a rapid rate, and perhaps too fast to foresee what was coming. The Great depression hit and all that Homer stood for came crashing down. The construction industry collapsed and America was in disarray: “In the first 10 months of 1930 alone, 744 US banks went bankrupt and savers lost their savings” (Slothower). It seems that just like a rose, Homer (America) was magnificent in his bloom; but paved the way for his own destruction moving too fast for society to keep up, crumpling and withering just like a rose at a funeral. Maybe if he had slowed down, they would have lived happily together and faced the economic downturn with more knowledge of the setbacks a construction boom can cause.

     In Conclusion the Great Depression began in 1929, two years before A Rose for Emily was published in 1931. I feel this strengthens the idea that the story is based on a history of the South at that time. The South experienced many changes going from the construction boom of the nineteen-twenties to the Great depression. The changes in society and attitudes to these changes are expressed in the story through the contrasting perspectives of the old and new generations. There is a definite connection to the history of the South explored through Homer Barron symbolizing the North and the expansion of America, and Miss Emily holding on to past ideals and traditions. The theme of isolation is prevalent throughout the text. I feel this theme instills a moral in the story that society will leave us behind if we are unwilling to change with the times. However we need to be wary of these changing times as they are not always positive and maybe it is wise to hold on to some past ideals and traditions as we never know when we may have to fall back on them.

  

Works Cited

Faulkner, William. A Rose for Emily in Ann Charters The Story and Its Writer An Introduction to Short Fiction. 8^th ed. New York: Bedford/St. Martin’s, 2011. 409-415. Print.

Slothower, Dennis. "Causes of the Great Depression."Economics.Help. Helping to Simplify Economics. N.p., 2008. Web. 2 May 2011. <http://econ.economicshelp.org/2008/10/causes-of-great-depression.html>.

"Symbolism In A Rose For Emily." WowEssays.com. Top Lycos Network, 2004. Web. 29 Apr 2011. <http://www.wowessays.com/dbase/ac2/xht124.shtml>.

The cruelty of humanity

Herman Melville’s Bartleby, the Scrivener is a difficult story to construe; nevertheless I read it a number of times to reinforce my understanding of it and what I found was very interesting. Melville’s structure of how he told the story is laid out differently to the norm. This confused a lot of people but I believe his unique structure was relevant to how he wanted the story told. The title character is not introduced until the fifth page but Melville explains that we need to know the other characters and the narrator before we find out about Bartleby. This I feel is necessary as it shows us the progression of the narrator and how he transforms after meeting Bartleby. I will explain this transformation in my analysis as well as the importance of the characters. Of course there are many interpretations of this famous short story but I felt the most prevalent is a reflection on the cruelty of humanity. Melville’s own experience as a child was that of poverty and this may have contributed to the selected theme of this story. At the age of 15, his father went bankrupt and Melville was forced to go to sea as a cabin boy.

     He began writing novels but when Pierre (1852), was dismissed by critics as incomprehensible trash, he turned to the short story. However this work and another novel failed to restore his reputation. He moved to a house in New York and it was only 30 years after his death that he received credit for his work. In examining Bartleby, the Scrivener, I feel it is important to know the background of the author in order to get a grip on what he is trying to tell us. I think his story reflects his life experience where the cruelty of humanity and society allowed no rewards for his years of hard work.

     In the beginning of the story we are introduced to an elderly man who is the narrator and is experienced in his line of work: “[t]he last thirty years, has brought me into more than ordinary contact with what would seem an interesting and somewhat singular set of men” (Melville 878). From his experience of people in the workplace and society, he has become a cold-hearted lawyer. He doesn’t seem to have a personal relationship with his employees calling them by their nicknames which were “deemed expressive of their respective persons or characters” (879). The lawyer seems to only care about the work his employees do: “[w]ith all his failings and the annoyances he caused me, Nippers, like his compatriot Turkey, was a very useful man to me; wrote a neat, swift hand; and, when he chose, was not deficient in a gentlemanly sort of deportment” (881).

Wall Street

     It’s as if the lawyer has become so cold that he doesn’t rely on his own conscience anymore so he uses Turkey and Nippers to act as his conscience for him: “‘Sit down, Turkey,’ said I, ‘and hear what Nippers has to say’” (887). Their contrasting moods suited the lawyer down to the ground. Nippers was cranky in the morning but relatively mild from 12 noon onwards while the opposite was said for Turkey: “I never had to do with their eccentricities at one time. Their fits relieved each other, like guards. When Nippers’ was on, Turkey’s was off; and vice versa. I am not sure what the purpose of Ginger Nut is but I think he may represent innocence. He is not yet aware of evils that lurk in society and goes about his little duties happily: “contained within a nutshell” (882).

     A transformation begins to occur in the lawyer after his first encounters with Bartleby: “There was something about Bartleby that not only strangely disarmed me, but, in a wonderful manner, touched and disconcerted me. I began to reason with him” (884). He feels pity for Bartleby seeing that some great misfortune has come over him. Even though he knows nothing of Bartleby, he sees that the cruelty of humanity has suppressed Bartleby to his current state of intolerability: “[i]t was his soul that suffered, and his soul I could not reach” (891). The lawyer starts to reach out to Bartleby in an attempt to gain back his conscience: “To befriend Bartleby; to humor him in his strange wilfulness, will cost me little or nothing, while I lay up in my soul what will eventually prove a sweet morsel for my conscience” (886).

     It was from the moment that Bartleby stood out from the crowd I think, that he got a hold of the lawyer and began transforming him: “Imagine my surprise… when… Bartleby, in a singularly mild, firm voice, replied, ‘I would prefer not to.’” (883). It is as if from this moment of refusal, Bartleby is showing the lawyer he is not just another scrivener and not another faceless part of his collection. He wants the world to recognize who he is much like how Melville wanted his work to be recognized.

     After Bartleby is sent to the insane asylum, the narrator saw what society had done to him. He heard a report “that Bartleby had been a subordinate clerk in the Dead Letter Office at Washington, from which he had been suddenly removed by a change in the administration” (904). The narrator feels great pity for Bartleby at this stage seeing him as “prone to a pallid hopelessness” with such a misfortunate job: “[c]an any business seem more fitted to heighten it than that of continually handling these dead letters, and assorting them for the flames?” (904). The dead letters seem to be symbolic of how Bartleby was shoved away and ignored when he needed to be delivered and helped. When he receives compassion from the lawyer, it seems he is already too far gone and it is too late for anyone to help him. It is as if Bartleby could never recover from the cruelty humanity inflicted upon him.

     In conclusion I feel Melville’s odd structure was a tactic used to draw readers in posing the question: Who is Bartleby? I think this story won its credit for the structure it holds. We see the cruelty of humanity expressed through the progression of the lawyer at the start as a cold-hearted man to a warm and caring person at the end as he saw the cruelty in humanity and tried his best to help Bartleby who had been affected by it. The lawyer has transformed from a man who saw his employees as just useful objects apart of his collection; to someone who cares and wants to change the world into a better place: “Ah, Bartleby! Ah, humanity!” (904).

                                                                Works Cited

Charters, Ann. The Story and Its Writer An Introduction to Short Fiction. Compact 8th ed. Boston: Bedford/St. Martin's, 2011. 878-904. Print

Ying and Yang

Author of Frankenstein Mary Shelley

The monster in Frankenstein regards himself as both Adam and Satan as he subject to the cruelties of mankind and neglected by his creator. Just like Adam he is the first of his kind alone and isolated.  In every human being there is the ability to do great evil and this evil prevails when people are neglected. The monster just wants friendship and to be able to communicate with his creator but he is denied this right. Adam wants to gain knowledge of the world and gives in to temptation by taking the apple. Similarly Frankenstein sets out to educate himself so he can wreak revenge upon his creator. This is how he regards himself as Satan as well as Adam. He began his life with good intentions but the desertion of his master drove him to rebel against him just as Satan fell from grace rebelling against God and falling from heaven to hell. Frankenstein examines the human condition and how good and evil are interconnected. The monster starts out like Adam with good intentions but concedes to sin becoming like Satan in rebellion leading to his downfall.

     Evil can grow within the good and vice versa. It is our socialization that shapes us into who we are and how we are treated by others. Primary socialization is normally enforced through parents or guardians. It is how we are trained to act, our mannerisms, morals, etc. The monster in the story was not offered this education and he was maltreated by his creator which I feel sparked the growth of evil within him. It’s just like racism in that it creates a vicious circle. If someone is slandered by someone stereotyping him/her, than that person is going to react in a negative way and perhaps fulfill the stereotype. This doesn't necessarily mean the stereotype is true. If the same person is addressed in a positive way, these stereotypes may never reach the surface. The monster in Frankenstein I feel is a human being deprived of a human life and treated like a monster which eventually turns him into a monster. The monster himself even says if he is treated right he will be good: “[m]ake me happy, and I shall again be virtuous” (103)

     I think ‘Frankenstein’ demonstrates how evil is present in many ways and sometimes evil is falsely perceived. For example both Frankenstein and the beast become evil but this evil is perceived differently. Frankenstein refers to the beast as being evil in character solely based on its looks: “demoniacal corpse” (59). This may also be a reference to the monster having become like Satan being a demon. There is a thin line between good and evil. Satan was an angel and Adam was free of sin but evil could still grow within them. However they both had the ability to remain good. It seems that the cruelties of mankind drove them to commit great evils but if given the chance they could have proved that they could be good.

     It is interesting in the scene with the blind man that he sees this good in the monster. As he is blind he is not discriminative towards others based on looks and he judges the monster based on his conversations with him. He is blind but he sees through words who the monster really is- a human being: “there is something in your words which persuades me that you are sincere….. it will afford me true pleasure to be in any way serviceable to a human creature” (136). The monster wants the friendship of Frankenstein: “[w]ill no intreaties cause thee to turn a favorable eye upon thy creature, who implores thy goodness and compassion?” (103). However Frankenstein’s wicked human nature in playing God and abandoning his creation (Adam) to a miserable life of solitude by animating him with ugly deformed looks; lead the monster to revolt against mankind just as Satan revolted against God.

     As the monster begins to gain knowledge of the world he sees the close link between good and evil: “[w]as man, indeed, at once so powerful, so virtuous, and magnificient, yet so vicious and base? He appeared at one time a mere scion of the evil principle, and at another as all that can be conceived as noble and godlike” (122). He knows he has become evil but wants to be good. Loneliness and abandonment drove him to do evil deeds but he seeks to be good again as he once was if only Frankenstein will accept his friendship: “Believe me, Frankenstein: I was benevolent; my soul glowed with love and humanity; but am I not alone, miserably alone?” (103). Frankenstein continues to neglect the monster and so the monster continues to play the role of Satan falling from grace where he once lived a pure and sinless life like Adam.

Works Cited

Shelley, Mary. Frankenstein. Rev. ed. London: Penguin Books, 2003. 59-136. Print.