Literary Modernism

            Literary Modernism originated in the late 19th and early 20th century, specifically 1914-1945. It was mainly used in North America and Europe. The main reason for the development of modernism was because of war in particular the world wars. People began to ask questions of what was becoming of the world, and in my views the literary modernism style, was a style to try and explain or answer why things of devastation were occurring. 
           Major events that caused authors to write in a literary modernistic form were women's rights and racial rights. In the 1920s the 19th amendment gave women the write to vote. The NAACP got black officers commissioned during war. There was a conversation of immigration with in North America, should it be allowed or should it not be allowed? People were also trying to find their identity. Especially after the war, it was hard for people to find themselves and try to put their lives back together. 
         Most writers today are still writing under the shadows of modernism which is now called post modernism. Some famous writers of modernism are; Ernest Hemingway, F. Scott Fitzegerald, and Wallace Stevens.

            Characteristics of modernism are: 

• Self consciousness and irony concerning literary and social conventions
• narration through fragmented or multiple perspectives or view points
• internalized or interior perception
• realistic details
• heroic individualism of romanticism
• mixes revolutionary and reactionary elements
• questions cultures                 

CITED FROM:           http://coursesite.uhcl.edu/HSH/Whitec/terms/M/modernism.htm         

Lynching- Claude McKay

The Lynching, by  Claude Mckay, is a poem about what it is like to be at a lynching back around the time of the civil war.  It talks about how the black man's sins were still unforgivable, and how his body swayed from the limb of a tree.  Most disturbing is how the women were described as thronging to look, but never did. (Thronging means to rush to the front or to a scene. Like how at a concert you have the people who want to be up close and up front to see.) Also, a part I read that was also disturbing, is when McKay says, how the little lads were lynchers to be.

I guess the main reason, I chose this poem to write about is because of how disturbing and devastating it was. For me, I could never think about watching someone struggle to live. I wouldn't be able to just stand their and watch someone die a gruesome and painful death, and let alone enjoy it. In my history class, that I'm currently taking, we learned that schools were closed, these lynchings were public events that happened during the day, so that as many people as possible were able to attend. That fact alone, showed me at least that they had no regret or remorse for what they were doing, They were able to kill a human being in broad daylight. They sometimes even advertised it. Lynchings were a family event. In a way I picture it was an outdoor drive in theater. They would have a family outing with a picnic.

Claude McKay does a great job at portraying the seen of a lynching. He makes it so his poem just paints a picture in your head. This is one reason why I am a fan of his poetry in particular. He makes it so his poems paint a picture in your mind, which helps plays with your emotions.

Uncle Tom's Cabin- Personal Synthesis

                Uncle Tom’s Cabin by Harriet Beecher Stowe, is a common title that is well known around America.  When I think of the story of Uncle Tom’s Cabin I think about the life struggles of an African American. How back before the Civil War, these human beings were treated as someone’s property just because the color of their skin was different.  As a person of color, they had no rights. They weren't allowed to have money, they weren't allowed to be educated, and they didn't have the right to express their religion or even have a religion. They were to work for free and do whatever was asked of them. They would get beaten for any reason, even the reason doing nothing wrong. We as readers are put into shock, when we realize how terribly people of color were treated back then, but to be honest we will never know. We hear the stories and see the examples through Uncle Tom’s Cabin, but we can never feel or come close to know the agony of discrimination and violence colored people faced.

                All this background knowledge of a story about how humans of color just wanted freedom, brings up the question to me is anyone really free? Yes, people of color got their emancipation, but honestly are they truly free?

                At the start of this spring semester, in my class we talked about the term: a single story.  The best way for me to describe a single story is as a stereotype. American’s single story is that we are all stuck up, power seeking, obese people. We think we are the dominate race.  For people of color back in the time before the civil war, even after the civil war, when they were “free,” they had a single story, of being uneducated, good for nothing, waste of space and life, and not deserving of any form of rights. To this day there are people who still believe in that single story. It is a sad fact, but it is indeed a fact.

                Harriet Beecher Stowe, in my opinion was writing what she witnessed, in her time period. Even though she was brought up not to believe in that single story, it still surrounded her world. Slavery was everywhere, the violence and wrongful acts were happening in the streets. It is still happening to this day. It certainly isn't as public or as bad as it was in the days before the civil war, but it still occurs.

Critical Commentary

  I chose the article Sentimental Power: Uncle Tom's Cabin and the Politics of Literary History By Jane P. Tompkins (P. 539-561). Her article as an article is hard to understand. From what I got out of this article, Tompkins argues against the point that some people think that women writers were just a group of women that wrote sentimental novels that were responsible for cultural evils that still affect life today. I think Tompkins” overall point is that she thinks that the novels these women wrote were a chance to highlight the American culture and to critique it, with in the aspects, for example how Harriet Beecher Stowe used slavery to highlight the cultural evils of that time.

          If I’m right about the summary of Tompkins’ main points, I believe she is absolutely without a doubt wrong. I don’t think anyone really would take a true event in our nation’s history, to highlight our culture, especially an event as horrific as slavery.

          One point that I’m hoping one of my readers of my blog might be able to explain to me is when Tompkins on page 560 says that “the new society will not be controlled by men but by women.” I don’t understand why she brings this point into play. What was her purpose of this statement?

Textual Background and Context

           I chose the article, A Visitor's Description of Slavery's Atrocity by J. Hector ST. John De Crevecoeur. (p. 422-423) This article is of a white man's journey to a planter's land for a visit and to dine with. The two lived about three miles apart, so the narrator decided to walk to the planter's residence. 
          On his way to the planters residence he felt a change of presence, it went from calm and subtle to where the narrator described the change in air as agitated. The narrator then heard a commotion about "six rods ahead of him." As he walked closer to the commotion he notices there was a cage with many birds ready to pounce on the care. Most to all the birds were large birds of prey. 
         As the narrator got closer he chased off the birds, within the tree hung the cage, and within the cage hung a negro man. The birds were looking to pray on the negro man. The description of the negro man was breath taking in horror. The narrator said he shuddered when he saw him. His disturbing description of the negro man was:
                                "I shudder when I recollect that the birds had already picked out his eyes; his         cheek-bones were bear; his arms had been attacked in several places; and his body seemed covered       with a multitude of wounds. From the edges of the hollow sockets and from the lacerations with         which he was disfigured, the blood slowly dropped and tinged the ground beneath. No sooner were     the birds flown and swarms of insects covered the whole body of this unfortunate wretch, eager to       feed on his mangled flesh and to drink his blood."
        This description of this man really brings me to realize how horrific it would have been to be an African American in this time period, but, then too, I realize I will never come close to be able to realize how it truly felt to be living in the time period, even as a white folk I could not and would not want to live in that time.
        The narrator then also ends his story, about how the negro man just wanted water to help clench his thirst. We learn as readers the negro man was in the cage for two days, and in a ways he was surprised that he had yet to die. The narrator wish he had a ball in his gun so he could put the negro man out of his misery, but he doesn't have the ammo. So instead he gets the negro man the water he had requested.

"The Yellow Wallpaper" Who is to blame?

            The narrator tells her audience how she suffers from a nervous disability/illness. She is to be kept inside all day by her husband John, with no source of socialization besides of her husband’s demeaning comments and her husband’s sister Jennie. The narrator soon becomes distraught and sees images of “creepy” women trying to escape the wall of which the narrator soon becomes obsessed with. Eventually, the narrator’s illness takes over and becomes mental, in her mind she turns into one of the “creepy” women trying to escape.       
     To me this brings up the question, would things be different if John allowed the narrator to adventure out and socialize. Even though he was the doctor, I feel as if the narrator was able to go out and explore, use her cognitive thought process, she wouldn't have turned mental. We try to do things to keep the ones we loved safe. I can understand John hiding the narrator for her own good, but a part of me wants to believe he hid her from the world for his own good. What I mean by this statement, is could John have been embarrassed of his wife? Did he hide her so his reputation wouldn't be ruined, or was he truly doing it for the love of his wife? Back to my original thought, as the audience in today’s society, I believe that if she was given positive human contact, she still would have been ill, but she wouldn't have gone mental ill. The illusions she saw served a person. The narrator wanted to help the “creepy” women escape and be free. In a way I believe the narrator initially thought of herself as the “creepy” women unconsciously who was trapped in the house. The narrator too wanted to be set free. Finally, the narrator turned into the “creepy” woman, not just in her mind, but physically. I believe even though John possibly could have kept her hidden out of the goodness of his heart, he is to blame.
  


 I just want to put in a side note for entertainment. I’m not sure if any of you readers have watched the movie “Mama” released in 2013, but when reading this short story and the narrator turned into a creepy woman, I immediately connected to the image of Mama in the movie. Both to me just wanted to be happy and set free.