February 23, 2007

Herman Melville's Benito Cereno was one of the first American mysteries that invited readers to figure out the suspenseful endings or surprise twist. Melville's protagonist, Captain Delano, lays out the foundation for the generic heroes in modern day scary movies and stories. Throughout the entire novel Delano is seen as the overly naive protagonist that the audience know will eventually save the day. Many readers can figure out the ending earlier on, and so they spend much of the novel hoping that the Captain will soon find out the secret behind this mysterious ship. It has the feel of the "I know who the killer is" or the "He's right behind you, run!" moments in the scary movies and novels. Readers find themselves wanting to jump in and tell Delano what is going on without completely ruining the plot of the novel.
The novel is also surprising in the actual subject matter that it covers. I find it incredibly surprising that Melville to the chance to write about something that was probably a fear of many people during his time period. The slave trade was a booming conglomerate during his time, and millions of dollars in revenue were made from the sale of slaves and the actual labor they provided was the backbone of the early American economy. The idea of slaves killing their owner and revolting on-board a ship was probably a more than taboo idea for slave captors as they would be the victim of this presumably violent revolts, and the plantation owners would fear this for the loss of thousands of dollars because of the unattained slaves.
Melville's audience would have found this story incredibly scary because it plays on the fears of the people during his time period. Readers during this time may feel a different sentiment. I feel for the protagonist because he goes out to the slave ship out of curiousity and an genuine desire to help. However, the act of the slaves revolting is almost a bit of poetic justice. They were taken by force into slavery, and were able to take their freedom back by that same force.

February 8 2007

Mercy Otis Warren's use of British satire as a method of mocking the British was effective for her audience of colonial revolutionaries. When read in the context of the time and climate of the American colonies. Her play would have been een as propaganda in support of independence from Great Britain, and not as simply as a form of artistic expression. I find it interesting that she personfies the negative characteristics of the Tories in the female form, and the positive qualities of the patriots as a man. In one of the last speeches of Meagre's, her brother is compared to Brutus for his bravery and willingness to stand against his "oppressors" (18). Those fighting for the rightly cause of independence and liberty were called man throughout the play. The evil and oppressive nature of the British and the Tories is compared to that Claudia, a historical figure that was capable of murder and deceit towards her husband.
Warren's method of classifying traits as either male or female can be attributed to the time period in which she grew up. While she was allowed schooling, it was unofficial because she only took the place of her brother, and she wasn't allowed to attend college. She was, however, able to break the social norms and become one the few leading political activists of her time. This position she is in is still discredited by her peers because she was put in her position only after the beating of her brother. Had her brother not been incapacitated, she probably would not have been granted the opportunity to have her works published in newspapers, and affect those around her. From this work, there is no formal call to action for her fellow patriots. Warren makes a mockery of the Tories, but does not suggest any plan of retaliation. Her play serves as inspiration to patriot, and reminds them at victory and liberty are within their grasp.

Febuary 2, 2007

Benjamin Franklin has always been a figure that is revered by Americans. His contributions to the founding of the United States have made him the "founding father" of the nation Throughout his autobiography, however, he comes across as self-righteous and vain. What started as an autobiography for his son to know his father's and his family's past, slowly became more of a memoir, which seemed like step by step guide to success. In a nation based equality and liberties, Franklin seems to focus on the obvious faults and areas of lacking in others.
Franklin's contribution to the United States cannot be overlooked, however. He writes his autobiography as if he knows how important he is to his nation and how much his contributions mean to others. It was important to him to dictate how he was remembered by the rest of the world. This could be seen as another example of his self-righteous nature. Instead of just letting his achievements speak for themselves, he instead decides that he is the only one that can accurately tell the story of his live, however subjective that may actually be