Funny Fanny

Sarah Payson Willis was one of the best-paid and most famous authors at the time. She remains one of the few women of the early 19^th century who was able to support herself from writing, which was highly unusual in such a male-dominant society. Under the pseudonym of “Fanny Fern,” Willis is remembered for her ironic vignettes, or short humorous stories. After all, who could forget a funny name like Fanny Fern? Like her pseudonym, her methods of humor allow readers to quickly engage in the story, absorb the plot with ease and enjoyment, and above all retain the central message. Through humor, Fern tackled tough, controversial issues, such as gender inequality and woman’s suffrage.

A lot of Fern’s writings addressed the injustices in a marriage and the lack of husbands’ appreciation for their wives. For example, in “Aunt Hetty on Matrimony,” Fern employs the comical persona of “Aunt Hetty” to dispel the “glories” of married life. She bluntly states, “Love is a farce; matrimony is a humbug; husbands are domestic Napoleons” (1794).

Similarly, in “Hungry Husbands,” Fern presents cooking as the only essential quality to win a man’s heart. “The straightest road to a man’s heart is through his palate,” she writes. Fern presents men as pigs, both literally and metaphorically.

While the topic of matrimonial inequality filled the lines of a lot of Fern’s vignettes, Fern addresses intellectual inequality in her article, “Male Criticism on Ladies’ Books.” Fern begins this article, in true Fanny Fern style, with a passage from the conventional writings of the day.

“Courtship and marriage, servants and children, these are the great objects of a woman’s thoughts, and they necessarily form the staple topics of their writings and their conversation. We have no right to expect anything else in a woman’s book.”

- N.Y. Times (1799)

While it is difficult today to believe that this quote was printed in the New York Times, it was a common argument women writers had to dispel. Fern not only dispels this familiar male critique, but dismisses it with creative humor. Upon considering the criticism of female literature, Fern paints an imaginative picture of the “snarling critic” as an unhappy man in a dark, old, dusty room, full of filth and cobwebs. He is selfish, alone and un-kissable. She labels him as a wretch, bitter from the refusal of some pretty girl. Although Fern’s words sound equally as harsh, her humorous exaggeration shows that men need women, both physically and intellectually.

Fern also goes on to note that the male critic is not only rude, but also foolish, by discounting his point that men are more intelligent. Fern astutely points out that if men were, in fact more intelligent, they would go about criticizing female novels in a more intelligent manner.

Overall, Fern’s works were funny and enjoyable, yet simultaneously influential and groundbreaking. With Fern’s ironic and sometimes outrageous phrases and metaphors, she opened up the door for women writers in America.

Although we have come a long way concerning women’s rights and gender inequality, thanks to brave, influential writers like Fern, sexist sentiments in society still remain. For example, I believe Sarah Palin was unfairly criticized by the media in the 2008 election. Even as a very smart politician, she was still portrayed as a slow hick from Alaska. Hopefully, contemporary wise writers, like Fanny Fern, can capture readers and continue to dispel gender inequality in today’s society.

Communal America

If I die, how badly will I be missed? Will my funeral be packed with meaningful mourners or will the church be vacant? What would my family and friends do without me?

Whether willing to admit it or not, these imaginative thoughts and speculations subconsciously slip into all of our minds at some point in time. In this sense, we are all able to sympathize and engage with Hawthorne’s Wakefield.

Contrary to other American authors, Hawthorne emphasizes setting as a key component of a literary work. The forces outside of a main character, such as location or background propel his plots forward. As part of his examination of outside influences, Hawthorne also fictively depicts the dynamics of an individual’s relevance and relationship with his or her surrounding community. Through ostracized characters, such as Wakefield, Hawthorne explores and defines America as a communal country embedded with a perpetual fear of outcasts.

Hawthorne’s Wakefield is a short story about a happily married man living in London. One day, the man – “let us call him Wakefield” – tells his wife he is “going on a journey.” For no reason, Wakefield abandons his life and wife by settling in a house only one street over from his original home. After 20 long years of solitude, he eventually returns home.

As a dark Romantic, Hawthorne often portrayed mankind as driven and controlled by a dark psychology. Wakefield (and human nature according to Hawthorne) is unpredictable. Actions cannot be reduced to clear cut motives. No one, not even Wakefield, knows why he leaves his wife. “The man took lodgings in the next street to his own house, and without the shadow of a reason for such self-banishment, dwelt upwards for twenty years” (1298). Adding to this oddity and unpredictability, Wakefield remains faithful to his wife by continually checking up on her. While his check-ups come off as stalking, obsessive behavior, his motive seems to be selfish. He wants to make sure that he is missed, and is devastated when he finds out that he is not.

As contributions to the Romantic literary movement, Hawthorne’s psychologically complex works of literature often conclude with memorable moral messages.

“He has left us much food for thought, a portion of which shall lend its wisdom to a moral…Amid the seeming confusion of our mysterious world, individuals are so nicely adjusted to a system, and systems to one another, and to a whole, that, by stepping aside for a moment, a man exposes himself to a fearful risk of losing his place forever. Like Wakefield, he may become, as it were, the Outcast of the Universe” (1303).

In this short story, Hawthorne’s moral focuses on the importance of community. Influenced by New England, Puritan thought, Hawthorne presents one’s community as a necessary emotional and physical resource. Without his community, Wakefield wanders around without purpose. By compulsively stepping outside of his routine tasks and surroundings, Wakefield becomes an outcast and witnesses his lack of importance to those around him. Wakefield, and the reader, realizes that the benefits of communal living are only received if one truly engages and supports others.

Although we do not live in 19^th century New England, we can still benefit from Hawthorne’s lesson on community. While individuality and prideful independence are continually reinforced by our contemporary society, Hawthorne’s Wakefield stands as a thoughtful reminder to care for and engage with the ones you love. You never know when they may step out of your life for 20 years.

Intellectual Declaration of Independence

Ralph Waldo Emerson still stands as one of the most influential American writers of all time. Through his writings, poems and speeches, Emerson began, what is now known as, the transcendentalist movement, which favored intuition over traditional doctrine. In 1837, Emerson delivered a famous speech, titled “The American Scholar” to the Phi Beta Kappa Society in Cambridge, Massachusetts. With this groundbreaking work, Emerson became the pioneering voice for the power of the American intellect, so much so that Oliver Wendell Holmes deemed “The American Scholar” to be America’s “Intellectual Declaration of Independence.”

Even 60 years after the revolution, Europe still exercised a heavy influence on American culture, especially literature. Emerson made the first notable attempt to break away from Europe’s intellectual shadow by characterizing a uniquely American style of thought and tradition. “Our day of dependence, our long apprenticeship to the learning of other lands, draws to a close,” Emerson declares in the opening of the address (1138). Specifically, in this essay, Emerson answers the question, “How can one be a scholar in America?” Emerson notes three areas in which Americans can make intellect their own – nature, books and action.

According to Emerson, a scholar must first turn to nature for inspiration. Through the “study of nature” one can come to “know thyself” (1140). When observing the basics of nature, we classify certain elements as either beautiful and noteworthy or boring and monotonous. By individually declaring these classifications, we become one with nature. Through individualized thought, we have the power to shape our interpretation of nature and therefore, nature itself. Emerson sums up the influence of nature on man, when he says, “Its beauty is the beauty of his own mind” (1140).

Emerson’s second source of inspiration for scholarship is books. “Books are the best of things, well used; abused, among the worst,” Emerson said (1141). Abuse of books comes from the mere recitation of historical facts, which was the staple of “bookworm” British intellect. Instead of memorizing history, Emerson believed books should only be used to gather information in order to form one’s own opinion. Books should inspire new thought and new theory.

Finally, a scholar must take action. In addition to exposing himself to a variety of professions and perspectives, a scholar must exert confidence in his own abilities to think and trust his intuition and instincts. Individualism, or the will to never give in to popular opinion, is the only source of true scholarship. Emerson criticized conformity when he said, “In the degenerate state, he (man) tends to become a mere thinker, or still worse, the parrot of other men’s thinking” (1139).

Although almost 200 years removed, Emerson’s call for America’s unique intellectual evolution, reminds me of Barack Obama’s rhetoric of the 2008 Presidential Election. Similar to Emerson’s opening words of “hope,” Obama also focused on the importance of education, in order to build a better and brighter America. Emerson reminds us, as students, and more importantly humans, that change is good and that the only hindrance to our success is our own imagination.

Emerson’s “American Scholar” address is an insightful and refreshing reminder for why I love studying liberal arts and literature so much. I found a perfect quote that summarizes Emerson’s core belief and inspires me to use my talents to better myself and help others. He once said, “Make the most of yourself, for that is all there is of you.”

The American Short Story

Washington Irving produced some of the earliest pieces of American fiction still read today. Irving is remembered most for his innovative contributions to the short story genre of literature. “The Legend of Sleepy Hollow” and “Rip Van Winkle” remain two of Irving’s most renowned artistic accomplishments. In both stories, Irving uses unique literary techniques to convey historical settings and events of America in the 18th century. Using traditional folklore, Irving established many notable themes of early American fiction, such as fables, the supernatural, narrative setting and the acceptance of change.

Irving’s most notable contribution to American folklore is his use of a well-developed chain of narration. Both the “Legend of Sleepy Hollow” and “Rip Van Winkle” were published in a collection of Irving’s short stories in The Sketch Book of Geoffrey Crayon. The volume has its own fictional author, Geoffrey Crayon, who finds these tales among the papers of a dead man named Diedrich Knickerbocker. This chain of narration lends an element of credibility to the stories by qualifying an actual source, whose words seem irrefutable. The multiplicity of authors establishes traditional folktales as useful in passing down and keeping American traditions alive, even in the face of revolutionary change.

Irving also enhances the importance of setting in early American literature. “The Legend of Sleepy Hollow” and “Rip Van Winkle” incorporate a clash between the city and the country as a primary narrative theme. Through detailed descriptions, Irving sets a distinct tone for his stories and engages his readers. The imagery makes the fictive elements of the magical folklore seem possible and authentic. For example, both tales are set in small villages at the foot of the Catskill Mountains. Irving personifies the wilderness with human and magical qualities. For example, in Rip Van Winkle the mountains are noted to “lord over the surrounding country, swelling to a notable height” and “glow and light up like a crown of glory” (954). This imagery sets a tone of mystery and unpredictability, making the mountains come alive to play tricks on those brave enough to venture through.

In addition to setting, Irving creatively weaves elements of the supernatural and the imagination into his narratives. The eerie and magical presence of ghosts advances the plot by creating disappearances in both stories. In “Rip Van Winkle,” the ghost of Henry Hudson induces 20 years of deep sleep on the protagonist, while a headless horseman is responsible for the disappearance of Ichabod Crane in “The Legend of Sleepy Hollow.” Irving’s works demonstrate how magical folklore can be beneficial by simultaneously providing entertainment and historical allusions.

While supernatural elements provide the basis for Irving’s plots, he also makes several important historical allusions. Most notably, both of his famous folktales include characters and remnants of the American Revolution. In “The Legend of Sleepy Hollow,” the Headless Horseman is the ghost of a Hessian trooper who was decapitated in battle, and now rides around in search of his head. This fear of British soldiers is also seen in “Rip Van Winkle”, when the new town accuses Rip o f being a “tory.” Irving’s writings, and other early American works, seem to perpetuate a stigma of King George or any monarchical rule. Through these folktales, the American Revolution is a historical truth and change that Americans had to adjust to, similar to the characters in “The Legend of Sleepy Hollow” and “Rip Van Winkle.”

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.

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).

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?