Wednesday, October 29, 2008

Judith Sargent Murray: the Female Pioneer – October 28, 2008

Judith Sargent Murray was one of the first proponents for the equality of men and women in American history. Through her essays, plays and poetry she advocated for women’s rights at a time when deeply entrenched cultural beliefs restricted women to insignificant societal roles. Although she was preceded by other female poets, Murray was the first to boldly venture outside the lines of “domestic poets,” such as Anne Bradstreet.

Murray’s groundbreaking success is a product of her privileged background. As with other areas, success results from a quality education. Murray’s parents were also hardworking, independent individuals, who allowed the local clergyman to tutor their daughter. Murray’s notions of female equality were also compatible with the Universalist church, to which her family belonged. These background factors are important considerations when evaluating Murray’s success.

True to her independent and unique style, Murray chose to present her arguments in two literary styles. In my opinion, Murray’s argument of equality in the form of poetry is more creatively intellectual and more efficiently proves her point. She begins her poem “On the Equality of the Sexes” by portraying the contemporary standards of inequality between the sexes. True to classical forms of argumentation this acknowledges the counter argument. Murray notes that “some people” (aka women) are thought to not possess the will or wish to improve, because they are not “lovers of knowledge” and shun mental pleasures. Society dictates women to be mere figurines, devoted only to pleasure. “Stupidly dull – they move progressing on – they eat, and drink, and all their work is done” (line 20).

Murray then describes “others” (aka men) as industrious and purposeful. However, she later elaborates that men operate under a disguise by automatically and genetically inheriting a “greatness of mind.”

After establishing the contemporary cultural beliefs about equality, Murray boldly argues for the legitimacy of the independent female mind. She centers her argument on equality being a natural and self-evident right. Women at the time, such as Murray, could fall back on the Constitution and the Bill of Rights as an inarguable foundation for equality. This natural argument is seen in lines 20 through 25, which is what I perceive to be the most eloquent stanza in the poem. “Tracing the hidden springs whence knowledge flows, which nature all in beauteous order shows.” Therefore, knowledge and intelligence flows straight from nature, and is therefore a natural gift or right for all.

Murray also points out the reason for apparent female inferiority. Men “sink so low” as to rob them of any chances to improve intellectually. Without an education, women do not have the opportunity to showcase their intellectual powers of imagination, reason, memory and judgment.

In addition to her eloquent poetry, Murray also elaborates her argument in the form of prose. While her poetry is creative and clever, her prose is bold, confrontational and direct. She addresses the heart of the problem of inequality between the sexes, when she asks, “Are we deficient in reason? We can only reason from what we know, and if an opportunity of acquiring knowledge hath been denied us, the inferiority of our sex cannot fairly be deduced from thence” (p. 727).

Through both her prose and poetry, Judith Sargent Murray stood as a living testament to the validity of her own arguments. Women can succeed and contribute to society as professional intellectuals. While equality of the sexes is a natural and self-evident argument, it is still a social justice issue that has not been solved in the 21st century.

Saturday, October 11, 2008

Knowledge – The Ticket to Freedom

I am a firm believer in the power of education. As humans, we should be open to new insights and never stop learning. Literacy is the essential foundation for true knowledge and wisdom. The skill of reading and writing exposes one to the outside world and provides all humans the opportunity for advancement. As English majors at Saint Louis University, a place where “knowledge touches lives,” we have the privileged opportunity to analyze important pieces of literature, such as the slave narratives, and learn from our great ancestors, as a form of self-advancement.

For American slaves, knowledge was not only power, but also the ticket to freedom. For example, Literacy, and other knowledgeable skills, allowed Olaudah Equiano to eventually purchase his own freedom. Literacy also enabled Frederick Douglas to escape from his southern master and plantation. Most notably, these slaves were able to record their own narratives, providing future generations the opportunity to learn from past mistakes.

Through his life narrative published in 1791, Equiano provides an early American slave perspective. Captured at the age of 11, Equiano had the unique advantage of experiencing and understanding the concept of freedom previous to his enslavement. Unlike other slaves, Equiano acquires vital life-skills which enable him to survive his captivity and eventually record his own narrative. Driven by curiosity, Equiano used every opportunity of his travels to learn from his masters and superiors. Since most of his life was spent at sea, he was able to acquire important seafaring skills. In addition, he embraced the opportunity to attend school in London. In Chapter IV of his narrative, Equiano notes, “I had long wished to be able to read and write; and for this purpose I took every opportunity to gain instruction. When I went to London with my master, I had soon an opportunity of improving myself (through schooling), which I gladly embraced” (689). Through hard work and the ability to manage ships, Equiano earns and saves a small amount of money, from which he is eventually able to purchase his own freedom.

Contrary to Equiano, Frederick Douglas was born into slavery and had no previous concept of freedom. However, that did not stop him from advancing himself beyond the cruelties of slavery. After learning the alphabet from his kind mistress, Douglas cunningly continues to become completely literate in hopes of escaping captivity. “From that moment, I understood the pathway from slavery to freedom,” Douglas declares. “Though conscious of the difficulty of learning without a teacher, I set out with high hope, and a fixed purpose, at whatever cost of trouble, to learn how to read” (2086). While completing errands for his master, Douglas made friends with poor, hungry white boys. In exchange for bread, these boys taught Douglas how to read. “This bread I used to bestow upon the hungry little urchins, who, in return, would give me that more valuable bread of knowledge,” Douglas describes (2088). Douglas then uses this “valuable knowledge” to plan and successfully escape from his master.

Through self-taught and self-motivated literacy, slaves such as Equiano and Douglas were not only able to improve themselves, but were also able to spread their knowledge and experience by recording narratives. In turn, their knowledge and stories gives us, as future students, the opportunity to better ourselves by learning from the mistakes and triumphs of history.
We should remember how Douglas eloquently described the significance of his literacy. “From that moment, I understood the pathway from slavery to freedom” (2086).

Thursday, October 2, 2008

Paine's "Plainness"

Persuasion can be a powerful political tool, especially during a time of war. In Common Sense, Thomas Paine masters the art of persuasion by appealing to a wide variety of American colonists, insisting on independence from Britain. As an effective rhetorician, Paine utilizes Aristotle’s classic lines of argument, including logos, ethos and pathos. In addition to invoking Aristotle’s arguments, Paine also adds a touch of his own persuasive style – simplicity and plainness.

In line with many other effective arguments, Paine begins Common Sense with logic. As a form of logos, Paine initially points out several different reasons to not break with England, and then rationally refutes those reasons. For example, some colonists believed America should stay loyal to the crown because England had been and would continue to be a reliable source of protection from other countries. He notes, “But she has protected us, say some” (632). Paine shifts this argument to his advantage by claiming England’s protection comes from her own self-interest, not attachment to the colonies. “She did not protect us from our enemies on our account; but from her enemies on her own account,” Paine refutes. Paine logically outlines his argument, making it hard to oppose his reasoning.

After grounding his argument in logic and reason, Paine uses ethos to show moral character. By establishing himself as a trustworthy, credible and honorable leader, Paine can persuade more people to align with his cause. In order to grab the attention of his readers, Paine boldly proclaims all loyalists to be cowards. “You have the heart of a coward and the spirit of a sycophant,” he writes (635). He then quickly reclaims his name-calling by explaining his lack of intention to offend anyone. Rather, Paine was trying to show how grave the colonists’ situation really was. This use of ethos builds Paine’s credibility as a capable and caring leader of the revolution.

One of the strongest lines of argument is the appeal to personal emotions, with human-interest stories and abstract ideals. Paine’s writing becomes more emotionally inspired as the pamphlet progresses. In detail, he describes the “wretchedness” of Britain’s six-month blockade on the city of Boston. “The inhabitants of that unfortunate city had no other alternative than to stay and starve, or turn out to starve. Endangered by the fire of their friends…in their present situation they are prisoners without the hope of redemption, and in a general attack,” Paine passionately depicts. By placing his readers into the troubled hearts and minds of those colonists suffering in Boston, Paine effectively uses pathos to emotionally engage the colonists in his revolutionary cause.

Above all else, Common Sense was able to persuade colonists to unite against England due to Paine’s “plainness.” By using simple, plain and logical language, he was able to transform the arguments of other influential leaders, such as Franklin and Jefferson, into a message that resonated with all colonists on all educational levels. The introduction emphasizes this strength. Paine says, “It is my design to make those who can scarcely read understand, and to put arguments in language as plain as the alphabet, so as to bring out a clear conclusion that shall hit the point in question and nothing else” (630). It is hard to refute an established leader who begins his work with, “In the following pages I offer nothing more than simple facts, plain arguments, and common sense” (631). If it is common sense, it must be true – right?