Reading Ideas Together 9-27

Posted by Mary
There was a Gilmore Girls episode where Rory, the main character, is so swamped by schoolwork her first semester of college that the papers she writes for her classes start spilling into each other. Her guidance counselor advises that she keep each subject separate rather than trying to get one idea to do "double-duty." This episode struck me because I was still in high school at the time and I had this great fear that what I was learning in one class would spill over into another class and I would receive the same reprieve. Why did it make me so nervous?

Well, as Davidson talks about how readers in the Early National American period read, I can't help but think that the importance of one text on a person could be greatly influenced by what other texts that person was reading around the same time. Ideas are often juxtaposed with each other in very unnatural ways in our education and individual learning processes. I remember reading Frankenstein for the first time during the same semester I was taking a Childhood Development course, and I nearly pulled a Rory Gilmore, trying to analyze Frankenstein's monster as a model of linguistic development. Really, though, I find myself creating knowledge in this manner all the time. We just read Starr and now we are reading Davidson. Putting those two books side by side in a course will always leave me with certain ideas about American exceptionalism when thinking about this period of history and how we develop histories.

What would be interesting, I think, is to look at how texts, being read at the same time, were in conversation with each other, perhaps creating little Frankenstein monster ideas of their own. What was that one man reading in the novel, listening to in a sermon, and scanning through in a newspaper? How do all these ideas from different sources of knowledge come together to create new knowledge? While Davidson is looking primarily at the novel being a "subversive" form according to a Bakhtinian understanding of prose fiction which incorporates many voices, it is interesting to think about how the external non-fiction related to the prose fiction and may have created contexts for knowledge in different ways. This is one of the benefits of doing the periodical searches. I would find it interesting to read a novel published during a certain year and read the non-fiction that was published around it. How would that context influence the reading of the novel as well?

(Forgive me for any incoherence as my head is quite clogged with the residue of the flu bug I've been fighting.)

Category: 3 comments

Teaching American Literature

Posted by Mary
Cathy Davidson's perspective, or perspective(s) on American literature definitely contrasts so much with Starr's that I was wondering if I was reading about the same nation's history. While Starr attributes the success of print culture to the unique structure of America's government that encouraged free speech and open thought, culminating in documents like the Constitution, which represented the the country's collaborative efforts to ensure political freedom, Davidson sees the novel as a genre that acted as various types of counterargument to the selective, exclusive documents of the fledgling country. She believes that by uncovering the novel and the way
the novel was disseminated and read, we may get greater insight into the voices that have been erased or excluded from the standard narrative history of our country.

As I think back on my own introductions to American history and American literature, I tried to remember what narrative I learned in school. It seems so long ago now, and I wasn't thinking very critically about the information I was processing to get an "A" on my tests. However, certain points that Davidson raised reminded me of various truisms I had heard in my own education. Yes, Cooper's Leatherstocking Tales were the definitive novels of the time. We learned that not only did they capture the spirit of America, but they also showed how the true American could assimilate well into a land once controlled by Native Americans. Natty Bumpo or Deerslayer was the ultimate expression of an true wilderness man, proving that Americans did indeed value the land and were perfectly capable of being friends with the Native Americans. The "bad guys," though white, are found out to be both European Americans and pirates, so their evilness is explained because they do not understand the true American spirit. However, the real lesson learned from Deerslayer was that early Americans loved dense description because it reminded them of the dense forests they had yet to search through. Every word was a little discovery. We even wrote a descriptive essay based on the book. These are the lessons I remember from reading only the snippets of Deerslayer we were assigned in ninth grade.

I also vaguely remember a picture of the Boston massacre from our history textbooks which I believe looked something similar to the one I found for this blog post, in which the heroes look strangely upper class and white, which is far different than Cathy Davidson's reminder that John Adams described them as "negroes and mulattoes, Irish teagues and outlandish jacktars." I never really thought about her point, until reading this introduction that once the Boston massacre became a symbolic moment of patriotism, the event was "whitened up."

I also remember talking to my dad about pride in being an American. I still like to talk to him about this issue, because he would proudly say that, though American has had it's problems, it is the greatest nation on earth which is why everyone wants to immigrate to our country. He's not anti-intellectual either. He was a history buff growing up and still is--soaking in any documentary from any perspective he can find. It makes me realize that it is easier to critique American exceptionalism within the context of Academia, yet outside of academia, a sustained critique of our country and its history will often agitate people like my dad, who sees that type of analysis as "un-American" or unappreciative of the many blessings we have been given, despite the problems (like slavery) we've had along the way. It might be interesting to invoke some Rogerian argument in these discussions--try to understand both sides of the issue to come to a better understanding of what being "American" means.

However, Davidson is talking to academics in American literature, primarily. Yet, even in her experience, she is seeing resistance to new discoveries about the novel because it breaks down the facade of stability many see in the canon and narrative of American literature that has already been established. Not being an Americanist, in the field of literature, I remember being handed a Norton Anthology of American literature when I was teaching at a community college and being told: "Go." While the anthology seemed more inclusive of diverse perspectives I had never discovered myself, I found myself drawn to the traditional authors when creating my syllabus. I sprinkled the course schedule with some settlers, puritans, founding fathers, a little Hawthorne, a little Poe, a little Dickinson, and of course everyone's favorite--Emerson. However, I did give one project in which the students could pick any author in the entire anthology, do a little research and present information to the class. I was shocked at what I was missing out on and amazed at student's response to authors like Fanny Fern (sadly a figure I had not been introduced to before that class) and Jane Johnston Schoolcraft, and Obijway poetess. In fact, I remember specifically my student, a retired military officer, who had lived in a small town where the Schoolcraft lived, grow completely enamored with her life story and the history of the Obijway people after doing that project, even looking in to present day problems.

Since then, I haven't returned to early American literature, but I agree with Davidson. There is a rich field to explore, a field of voices that will give us a better picture of what being American means, what it meant to many people in the past, and how we can affect current policies when we better understand our diverse history.
Category: 0 comments

The Royal American Magazine: Contributing to American Identity

Posted by Mary
I decided use "wife" as my search term, and I ran across an interesting poem in the March 1775 edition of "The Royal American Magazine: Or Universal Repository for Instruction and Amusement." The poem was sandwiched between other poems, a position which prompted me to look at the periodical as a whole, to place this poem in the context of what this periodical was trying to achieve.

The blog opens with an address to its subscribers who are named as Gentlemen. It seems that the articles and poetry in the periodical about women, then, are addressed to men, specifically gentlemen, probably of upper class, considering the title of the periodical is The Royal American magazine.

The very first article that appears is on called "On Pleasure" immediately followed by a quote from Alexander Pope: "Pleasure, if wrong, or rightly understood, our greatest evil or our greatest good." This opening article, along with the quote and the subtitle of the periodical indicate that the pursuit of man is pleasure, but it can be a good or bad pleasure. If women are included in a man's pleasure, he must be instructed whether he is withdrawing the correct form of pleasure from a woman. The primary article explains that while it is right for a man to pursue pleasure, a wise man will pursue a pleasure that leads to greater morality and intelligence rather than sensual gratification.

I find this interesting counsel interesting in light of the direction periodicals would take in the next century. Though Starr often associates higher literacy with the rise of available print culture, he also notes that this literacy was often accompanied by a ravenous appetite for sensation stories--scandalous news and fiction. This periodical precedes this stage and seems to hope for a more cultured pursuit of pleasure.

The next article continues the theme of pleasure, reiterating that the ultimate end of man is his happiness. This article (actually in the form of a letter) expands upon the first by exhorting men to find their happiness in "God, who ordereth everything for universal good." In the following pages, one finds that happiness is found in the idyllic country, in rest, in leisure to study the classics--all luxuries of the elite, even though from the beginning readers are told happiness comes apart from circumstances.

After a few letters to the editor, there comes a story, based on the introduction, intended as a moral story. Yet, I wondered, if this periodical is for men, what would interest them in "The Wife of Ten Thousand: A Moral Tale?" ah, but then I saw. The husband (who ends up giving bad advice to his wife on how to manage her house) was a man of money. He was a man whose "prevailing foible was to want to life like a man of quality." It seems to be a recurring theme throughout this periodical to distinguish between a man of moral character and a man who loves money. The periodical continues to neglect that its audience is probably much wealthier than most Americans in order to have the leisure and the classical background to understand the allusions within the fiction. It makes me wonder if some of the assumptions that we make in looking back on the period--about the democracy and egalitarianism of America was artificially created by rhetoric like that found in this particular journal, for it seems that the men reading (and contributing) must feel that they are nobler and more moral than the men of luxury they decry.

I want to get to the original poem I found, but I want to mention that in line with this theme of a constructed American identity, valuing simple morality and intelligence for all over rich excess, there is a poem that precedes the wife poem called "A Lady Recovering from Small-Pox," which indicates that the woman was quite greedy and enamored by luxury when she was suddenly overwhelmed with the disease. Interesting moral there.

But here is the poem that instructs men, as sensible and moral, to choose a wife for their pleasure. In "The Choice or The Model of a Wife," the woman is to be "virtuous" and "beautiful." She is to have a good "form" as well as "mind." Her "virtue" (ahem metaphorically) shall arise from her "breasts." She is to have "endearing sweetness, devoid of pride." Even though he wants her to have a good mind, she should not be talkative: "without loquacious wisdom wise..." avoiding "tattling" and "slandering." After all this she should be able to see her own faults (though I'm not sure which she's allowed to have at all). However, she must be able to overlook others's faults (I'm assuming those of the man speaking in the poem.) In fact, she knows how to "appease" her provoked husband, if necessary as she is his "healing balm" who can sooth his passions.

I believe this journal is an interesting example of how the a nation can begin creating its identity through print. Literature, as Klay notes in his blog, is so important to the formation of a society's beliefs and actions. Though it is not a linear process, from print to action, what we read, what we accept, what we write, all contribute to our worldviews and even the myths we continue to propagate. Studying literature, even looking at a periodical with relatively obscure poetry, helps us see how instrumental fiction and non-fiction is in creating identity and ideas.
Category: 1 comments

Puritans, Quakers, Education, and Print

Posted by Mary
Brief note on my reading: As I'm reading this text, I'm also reading English Common Reader: A Social History of the Mass Reading Pub. Unfortunately, I seem to be a naturally linear thinker, and keeping track of historical progress gets difficult as dates seem helpless strewn from page to page of two different books. As a reading practice, whenever I read historical pieces I try to re-outline dates in a Word Document so I can see the chronology that I'm reading more clearly. I think it is important to understand dates not in order to set up a rigid understanding of the order in which certain events take place, but it helps me not to make false assumptions about what may or may not be happening at the time. For instance, Starr uses this strategy--presenting a timeline of American political history alongside a timeline of American print advances--in his defense that American print culture grew as a worldwide force, not because of technological advances, but rather because of social and governmental uses of print for various reasons. What will be interesting if I finish both outlines, complete with the respective author's conclusions about what the dates mean, is to see if the ultimate arguments of the books stand. I'm thinking there may be some discrepancies considering the decidedly British focus of Richard Altick's book and the decidedly American focus of Paul Starr's book.


Alas, I have not finished my outline, yet, but I hopefully I will finish both. Priorities in writing assignments often keep me from making the printed notes I always have high hopes of making.


One point Starr makes in Chapter 2: New Foundations piqued my interest. I wrestled whether or not to label his evaluation of Puritan contribution to literacy, traditional or subversive. I suppose in the current climate of literary studies, it would be considered subversive. Most teachers of Puritan culture and literature capitalize on instances of their intolerance and hypocrisy at the expense of their contributions. Starr explains that the Puritans set a precedent for education in the colonies that was not seen elsewhere in French or British societies. He even highlights that female literacy rose in the New England society because of the effort to extend literacy outside of class hierarchies (which would include gender privilege to some extent as well.)

Being a fan of the collection of Puritan prayers Valley of Vision, I appreciated Starr's concession that the Puritans were a positive influence on the growing literacy in the country, despite many of their confirmed in-egalitarian practices. It's interesting, though, that Starr sets Puritan literacy practices in opposition to the Chesapeake Bay and Virginia colonists' ideas concerning print. In this way, he champions the often derided Puritans for being more progressive than those of Chesapeake Bay who shut down printing presses and had no booksellers.

On the other hand, I feel that Starr unjustly tips the scales in favor of the Puritans over the Quakers as he relates the progress (or lack of) print production in the Middle Colonies. Having a limited knowledge of the Quakers and their role in education and abolition movements later in the 19th century, I wonder how Starr can so easily say that they followed a "pattern in print communication that was surprisingly closer to the Chesapeake's regime than to New England's" (54). While I have no positive proof to refute his short example of Quaker intolerance toward publishing, I would like to see perhaps a more engaged look at what type of print culture and education Quakers did offer. Like the Puritans, or any religious group, there will most likely be forms of suppression of ideas for the sake of each religion's pursuit of truth and integrity. However, Starr only gives an example of how the Quakers prohibited Bradford from publishing certain material. He failed to give any other examples, though clearly there were materials being published to increase literacy and knowledge. I'd like to see more study done on Quaker education and publication at this time.
Category: 2 comments