In the Land of the Free: The True Antagonist

In Sui Sin Far’s In the Land of the Free we read the tragic story of two Chinese American parents who reluctantly leave their new born child to American missionaries. The reason for this is because the child was born in China and he had no official papers indicating he belonged to the parents, Lae Choo and Hom Hing. After going through legal battles and loss of fortune, Lae Choo, the mother, is finally reunited with her son. For those who have read the short story, you know what happens, but for those who haven’t read it I will avoid spoiling the story.

I wanted to discuss the role of James Clancy, the lawyer. He is the person who was able to reunite Lae Choo with her son after going to Washington DC to testify her case. As a reader I thought Clancy was a good person who fought for the rights of the parents. But after examining the text I was confused as to whether he was actually a good person. In the story, he first showed Hom Hing the letters from the government stating where the son as being kept. But as Hom Hing remarked to lawyer as to whether he had anything to say, “Nothing. They have sent me the same letter fifteen times now.” The letters didn’t help the situation, so Clancy offers his services to go to DC himself and testify. However, he asks for a great deal of money and my answer to his good will was clearer. When Lae Choo calls Clancy a “common white man”, referring to him as just a typical greedy American, he responds with, “Yes, ma’am” and a bow. The text describes his response as “ironic”. I took this as he bowed to her in a caustic and disrespectful. Like he got caught for his true intentions and proudly admitted to them.

As I read the short story, I thought to myself that every story no matter the length has a protagonist and antagonist. At first read I saw the United States as the villain, but I realized that Clancy and his greed were the true antagonist of the narrative.

#BlackLivesMatter

     The Narrative of the Life of Frederick Douglass, an American Slave is the story of Frederick Douglass’ life and experiences as a slave.  Slavery is one of our nations most shameful periods of time that will always be a part of United States history.  I assume most readers would agree with me that reading narratives from former slaves is incredibly disturbing.  It is difficult to grasp that during this time in our nation’s history, it was acceptable in certain areas of the country to dehumanize people because of their race.  It is completely absurd nowadays to even think about committing such horrible acts.  Throughout the novel, I kept repeating in my head, “black lives matter”.  After the deaths of three African American males at the hands of police enforcement made it to the media, people have come together to bring awareness to the atrocities the men, as well as many others, have faced.  Now it has not been completely proven that these men died because of their races, but the fact that more African Americans are killed by police enforcement and have a higher incarceration rate are enough evidence for us to safely assume that race is more than likely a factor in these incidents. 

    Furthermore, it is difficult to compare slavery to modern police brutality but a common theme is the mistreatment of African Americans and the disregard of the importance of the individuals’ lives.  During slavery, the slaves’ masters brutally beat them for many reasons, many for which were completely unnecessary and cruel.  Although in the cases of the three men murdered, the officers believed that they had probable cause to shoot the individuals.  Whether the probable cause was legitimate, they (and the jurors) believed that the murders were just.  In my opinion, the murders were completely unjust and could have been handled in a different way.

     One of the most disturbing parts of the novel was when Frederick Douglass recounts his Aunt Hester being brutally whipped by their master as she hung there naked with her hands above her head.  “ He then said to her, ‘Now, you d____b b____h, I’ll learn you how to disobey my orders!’ and after rolling up his sleeves, he commenced to lay on the heavy cowskin, and soon the warm, red blood (amid heart-rending shrieks from her, and horrid oaths from him) came dripping to the floor.” (Douglass, p. 52)  Black lives matter.  The master was beating Aunt Hester because she disobeyed him when she left the house.  Just because the slaves were of a different race and that they disobeyed their masters should not have been a valid reason to why these horrendous acts were committed.  Was it irrational to believe that these people’s lives matter?

     Yes, there were certain groups of people in the country who believed it was okay to treat people like this because they were African American, just like there are people today who STILL think it is acceptable to treat someone differently because of their race.  Another disturbing section of the novel was when Frederick Douglass was beat by Mr. Covey, on multiple accounts.  The first intensive beating, and most memorable to me, occurred after the incident with the oxen.  After Douglass had the conflict with the oxen, Mr. Covey showed him to the woods where he claimed he was going to help him “trifle away” time.  Mr. Covey then ordered Douglass to take off his clothes to prepare to be punished; he did not obey. “Upon this he rushed at me with the fierceness of a tiger, tore off my clothes, and lashed me till he had worn out his switches, cutting me so savagely as to leave the marks visible for a long time after.” (Douglass, p. 102) 

     In the incidents of police brutality, there were times that it was said by witnesses and defendants that the victims were not obeying to the commands from the police officer.  We can only assume that they were fulfilling the oath to tell the truth and nothing but the truth, but was it necessary to murder the men because they were not obeying? Was it necessary to beat Frederick Douglass because he made a mistake? Absolutely not.

     It can be safely assumed that nowadays, slavery is frowned upon in the United States.  I wish I could say that murdering an innocent man because of his race and the stereotypes that follow him is frowned upon, but after the way #BlackLivesMatter was handled, I have lost confidence in this country.  This is not the 1800’s, the people of this country should NOT continue to be discriminated, stereotyped, or killed because of their race.  Black lives have and always will matter.

Image from http://www.cogic.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/12/BLM.jpg.

Misrepresentations of Slaves

Frederick Douglas was a slave who witnessed the oppression that his people had to go through.  He was born a slave and knew nothing more than to be a slave and follow orders. In his narrative he describes how he saw the gruesome beatings that his masters would put upon other slaves. Douglas went through his slave life not having an education to be able to show him that learning is the power to fight the oppression. This is what makes Douglas a hero to slaves and an inspiration for all. Recently I had a conversation with my friends and some reason the movie Django Unchained came up. My friend in the middle of the conversation said “Django is a hero to the slaves.” After he said this I really thought about what made him a hero to the slaves, but I could not figure out what made him a hero. I believe this is a misrepresentation of how Americans perceive slaves through the media.

            Frederick Douglas became a hero not through super powers or by shooting slave masters, but through education. He understood the importance of education when one of his masters began to teach him the alphabet and started to teach him how to read. From this experience Douglas learned that the path for freedom was through the power of education. Douglas realized that he was unhappy even before education, “But, by this time, I began to want to live upon free land as well as with Freeland; and I was no longer content, therefore, to live with him or any other slaveholder,"( page 122). Douglas knew that to overcome the oppression himself through education he would not only help himself, but also help others. He had to do it for those who woke to a life that really did not belong to them. This is what makes Douglas a hero to me, that even though he was able to get himself an education, what he did with it after to help others makes him a hero to slaves.  

            On the other hand, Django Unchained is a movie about a black slave in the 18^th century who befriends a German bounty hunter in order to save the love of his life from slave owners. The audience follows Django on an adventure that leads him to kill many white slave owners. Djagno in the movie acts as Schultz’s valet throughout the movie. Is Django really free in this spaghetti western? It seems he is not because he is bound by this stranger who he meets and promises freedom after the job is done. But what if Schultz did not die and forces Django to keep accompanying him on his bounty adventures? The ending of this movie really leaves the audience questing if Django is really a hero for slaves and if he is really free from slavery. Sure Django saved the love of his life, but it is only an individual accomplishment. Gaining his own freedom and gaining the love of his life are personal gains. This shows that he is not a hero to any of the slaves in this movie, but only a hero to Broomhilda, his love interest. In the end is this really how Americans want to portray slavery.

            I know it’s only a movie, but what bothers me is that a person could think Django could be a hero to slaves even though Django is selfish. If one person believes this then others believe that Django is a hero to slaves. I would not even consider Django a hero what so ever because his motivation is all about himself and to save a girl he loves and nothing else. While Frederick Douglas may not be as flashy as Django, his intentions and actions are better. Douglas is able to realize that education is the key through the little glimpse of education his master gives him. Douglas has inspired many others to break the barrier of slavery and to receive an education to gain knowledge. Even today his motives and actions have influenced many people. 

Follow Your Leader

In Herman Melville’s Benito Cereno we witness the main character, Captain Delano, spot an erratic ship in the distance. He decides to board the ship and as he heads towards the ship he sees a phrase written below the figure-head. As Delano describes it, “Rudely painted or chalked, as in a sailor freak, along the forward side of a sort of pedestal below the canvas, was the sentence, ‘Seguid vuestro jefe’ (follow your leader)…” (165). Delano’s emotions aren’t fully known, but as a reader I saw this phrase as a positive sign. As I read this passage for the first time I thought it as a sign of good faith within a cloud of mystery and ominousness. At first read I knew little of how well that quote worked as foreshadowing.

            As the tale continues, we learn of the true dark significance of ‘Seguid vuestro jefe’. While a rather strange scuffle occurs between the two ships, the madness that ensues uncovers the figure-head of the San Dominick; revealing the skeletal remains of the true captain, Captain Alexandro Aranda. This chaotic scene is heightened once the bones are seen hung on the edge of the ship. In Benito Cereno’s deposition we learn that Babo was the one who wrote ‘Seguid vuestro jefe’, which explains why it looked rudely painted. Babo tells the remaining Spaniards, “Keep faith with the blacks from here to Senegal, or you shall in spirit, as now in body, follow your leader” (245) as he points to the bones of Aranda. This initially inspiring quote for seaman is shown to actually be an aggressive threat.

            I was very intrigued with how well Melville set up the significance of the quote. I cannot speak for everyone, but I think including the quote in the beginning was supposed to have readers feel optimistic about what will happen next. Perhaps I’m just not reading well enough into the words. It’s amazing how much the meaning of words can change depending on the situation. One humorous example is placing emphasis on a different word in the following statement: “I never said she stole my money.” (go ahead, try it). But in the case of Benito Cereno, the phrases ‘follow your leader’ became a threat in a way I never would have imagined. 

The Woman on the San Dominick

The Woman on the San Dominick

     Captain Delano’s description of the women on the San Dominick was interesting in the fact that as I reader, I could not distinguish his feelings toward the women.  It was difficult to tell if he admired them or if he was puzzled by their different personas.  He seemed to be very curious about the woman that he first saw with the child.  I would like to explore his descriptions and how they could be related to modern concepts of women.

     “His attention had been drawn to a slumbering negress, partly disclosed through the lace-work of some rigging, lying, with youthful limbs carelessly disposed, under the lee of bulwarks, like a doe in the shaded of a woodland rock.” (Melville, p. 198)  Captain Delano’s first description of the woman he had noticed seemed pleasant for the circumstances.  He had compared her to a doe, which can be related to a peaceful motherly figure.  This woman had just been lying there resting when Delano noticed her.  The story continues with “Sprawling at her lapped breasts, was her wide-awake fawn, stark naked, its black little body half lifted from the deck, crosswise with its dam’s; its hands, like two paws, clambering upon her; its mouth and nose ineffectually rooting to get at the mark; and meantime giving a vexatious half-grunt, blending with the composed snore of the negress.” (Melville, p. 198) 

     It can be concluded from this passage of the story that the women on board are mothers, potentially working mothers who also have to care for the children.  Captain Delano was pleased with the sight of these women, especially the woman with her child who only showed love to it after being woken up.  An interesting section of the passage states, “He was gratified with their manners; like most uncivilized women, they seemed at once tender of heart and tough of constitution…” (Melville, p. 198)  Uncivilized women, what does that mean? Where did that come from? Were these women portrayed as uncivilized because they were slaves?  When I think of the term uncivilized, I think of an individual who is disrespectful and not socially advanced.  Therefore, just because slaves may not be considered people at this point does not mean they are not civilized individuals.  Are they uncivilized because they are African American?  

     From my understanding of the text, the way Captain Delano sees the women on board is much different from what he has seen before.  He praises them for being different but generalizes them as being uncivilized women.  Captain Delano’s perception of the women was confusing to understand.  I could not decide if he was belittling the women by calling them uncivilized or if that was just part of the women’s appearance.

     I think this can relate to modern views on women because even in 2015, there are still men (and women) out there who believe that women are only good for being mothers.  As I mentioned before, for this time, that could have been the common perception of women.  But even in today’s society, women are still suffering from these ideas that were present centuries ago.  Delano’s admiration for the woman is still a popular concept, comparing her to a doe and her child to a fawn.  It is a agreeable metaphor, but it is also still conflicting that they are also deemed as uncivilized.  What made Delano relate these women to other uncivilized women?

     Women have always been conceived to be motherly figures that will care for their children as well as sacrifice so much for their children.  To me, comparing that to an uncivilized woman does not make sense.  You would think that a women who is nothing but a mother to her children would be civilized, or domesticated, right?  The term “uncivilized” can really just be an ode to slavery, but in the context of this passage, I think it is up to the reader to consider more meanings of it.

Striving for Perfection

“The Birth Mark” by Nathaniel Hawthorne is a story about a husband named Alymer who tries to make his wife Georgiana perfect. Georgiana is almost perfect to him, but has a birth mark on her face that Alymer believes is an imperfection. Not everyone believes Georgiana’s birth mark is an imperfection, but these people actually believe the birth mark enhances her beauty. At the end of the “Birth Mark” we see that Georgiana becomes perfect, but it comes at the cost of her life. The question I am wondering is whether perfection is something we should actually strive for?

            We can be perfect at activities like perfect attendance in class, getting the highest possible grades, and even having a perfect record in any sport. There are many other ways for us to try to be perfect in life, but the catch is that no one in life will be able to be perfect at life. There are too many complications and alternatives that will get in the way of living a perfect life. Even if we think someone like a celebrity has a perfect life there are many behind the scene implications that cause them to live an imperfect life. Friends close to us can seem like they have everything figured out, but in reality they to deal with imperfections in their lives. I believe that we have pressure in this day and age to be perfect. When we have to show our grades when looking for a job they only care what’s on paper and not we learn. We all have those things that hold us back from living that perfect life. These obstacles that hold us back are important for our lives because if we were perfect there would be no motivation to be better and strive for perfection.  

            Whenever I think about striving for perfection I always think about Kobe Bryant. Growing up as a Laker fan I have heard multiple times that Kobe Bryant is trying to reach perfection. Even Kobe has said he is striving for perfection, “I’m chasing perfection.” It’s as simple as that, but what is perfection for someone like Kobe? Is it to win as many NBA titles as Michael Jordan? Is it to score as many points as he can possibly score? Or could it be to miss as many shots as possible? Of course the last one is not what Kobe has in mind when it comes to reaching perfection, but where is the line that he has to reach for perfection? Kobe has already sustained so many injuries that if there is a line he has to cross to reach perfection Kobe might have to crawl because his legs do not have much left in them. But this is what fascinates me about Kobe; he already has done so much as a player, yet he still continues to do more and try to accomplish more. A lot of players would have quit after acquiring an injury like his, but his strive for perfection keeps himself going.

            Having a perfect life is impossible, but to strive for perfection is important to have in our lives. I’m not saying to take a potion to get rid of any flaws and then die; I just think perfection pushes us to become the best possible person we can be. If we did not have flaws there would be no reason to try to be better. Our flaws make us who we are as a people. Our imperfections set us apart from one another. This is why striving for perfection is important because the obstacles we face are different which ultimately makes us unique.

            I think striving for perfection is something we all need to do. But does that mean Alymer was right to try to make his wife perfect? In his eyes she was almost perfect and needed to get rid of the birth mark to achieve perfection. In this situation I believe Alymer was wrong because he tried to reach perfection through someone else and not strive for it himself. Vince Lombardi once said, “Perfection is not attainable, but if we chase perfection we can catch excellence.” We will never reach perfection, but by striving for perfection we can live an excellent life.

           

            

My Carwin Theory

Although we have finished reading Wieland, I wanted to write this blog because I thought it was a very intriguing topic. As I read the novel I kept thinking of Carwin’s intentions with using his voice to deceive people. Carwin says that he likes to test people (pg. 190) with his ventriloquism but as anyone who has the novel knows, this skill of his leads to the deaths of at least six people. But when reflecting on the book once completing it, I had this idea of why Carwin did what he did.

We know from Carwin’s confession to Clara that the first time he used his skill with the Wieland and Pleyel families was when he was in the family tower and found the note addressed to Wieland (pg. 192). This note contained the information about the land that Wieland inherited in Europe. It is here that Carwin decides to acquire the inheritance. But the only way to do that is to dispose of Wieland and those who know if the inheritance. My theory is that the rest of the novel is Carwin’s scheme to kill people off and driving others crazy in order to obtain a large fortune with no complications.

Carwin easily disposes of Katherine and the kids through Wieland, so they were no problem. Pleyel had to be convinced to stay in America in order to not visit the inherited land. Carwin’s way of accomplishing this is was by convincing Pleyel that his lover had died (pg.193). Without her, Pleyel wouldn’t have a reason to go abroad.

Wieland was also easily taken care of because Carwin took advantage of Wieland’s devout faith. Carwin led Wieland through a mental breakdown and caused him to kill himself. Now for the toughest to convince, the rational Clara. I believe Clara is the reason why Carwin’s plan failed. In a sense, Clara’s interest in Pleyel led Carwin astray from his scheme. When Carwin learned of Clara’s affection towards Pleyel, he began to mess with her. If Carwin had ignored Clara he may have been able to accomplish his plan.

I know that this theory is farfetched, but this is what I saw and fully believed to be true. As I read the novel I expected the ending to bring up some sort of scheme that Carwin planned. What other reason would this man have to cause so much distress to a family? The idea of natural perverseness, as seen in “The Black Cat by Edgar Allen Poe, does seem to apply. Perhaps Poe got the idea of natural perverseness after reading Wieland, or the Transformation. Or perhaps Carwin was really an accomplished thief and Wieland’s fortune was his next target.