I have now reviewed all of the test answers. As predicted, the scores were considerably higher than the midterm (85.77 mean vs. 77.9 mean).
I will email you personalized comments for question #1 and #2, since everyone chose quite differently. For question #3, I will copy some of the major points below because you might find it interesting to see what your classmates wrote.
I will also post some sample high-scoring answers in the comment reply. The scale was the same: 30 possible points for each question and then 10 added to the total to equal 100%.
Oh, and the winner of the Avatar contest (for highest grade on the test) is Rea. You are now the proud owner of a toy from Burger King fast food restaurant.
Question #1 (28 x 25.07)
---------------------------------
Fiction (10 x 26.30)
Rhetoric/Speech/Essay/Jeremiad (8 x 23.38)
Satire (4 x 27.25)
Lyric (3 x 26.00)
Autobiography (3 x 22.67)
Twain (10), Irving (8), Chesnutt (7), Jacobs (7), Lincoln (5), Thorpe (5), Franklin (4), Marti (4), Tecumseh (4), Zitkala Sa (4), Bradstreet (3), Dunbar (3), Red Jacket (3), Cooke (2), Equiano (2), Wheatley (2), Douglass, Dubois, Edwards, Emerson, Freneau, Hawthorne, Pima, Pontiac, Roosevelt, Winnemucca
Aaron's note: It seems that the "nonfiction" genres presented more difficulty. Although they were a major focus of the class week after week, it is possible that y'all still have less practice and confidence analyzing them. Remember, even an autobiography or an essay is a piece of literature that has consciously constructed (and unconsciously constructed) features.
Question #2 (27 x 25.41)
---------------------------------
Twain C (7), Twain A (2), Twain B (1), Other Twain (3), Equiano (4), Dunbar (2), Lincoln (2), Douglass, Dubois, Jacobs, Roosevelt, Wheatley
Aaron's note: I was happy to see such a wide variety of choices. I hope to do more "microscopic" analysis next semester; we will be reading more poetry, and I also think you have a better idea of 20th century U.S. history, not to mention you now have a better grasp of the major ideological concepts.
Question #3 (28 x 25.61)
---------------------------------
Aaron's note: These answers were quite good, especially in analyzing the value of literature in general and American Literature in particular. Some even contested or reframed my use of the word "value." My one disappointment was that very few made a specific argument about Early American Literature, which in theory was part of the question.
Why literature, or why not?
+Another perspective on history, philosophy, or other fields of knowledge
+Creates a sense of shared experience
+Can give a sense of national identity (or distortions thereof)
+methods of interpretation/analysis can be applied to other ends
+certain themes/patterns repeat across nations and periods
+reduces boredom
+literary study can lead us to rethink our notion of "value"... even Aaron's question could be deemed somewhat limiting and dull
+literature is not only a reflection of society but also a force of influence
+graduate school admissions (seems like a bit of a circular argument if you ask me)
+critical thinking skills can be developed in a more enjoyable process
+to learn how to formulate and defend theories/interpretations
+can be an alternative or antidote to the shallower frame of contemporary political rhetoric
-Experience can be alienating or disconnected from experience
-Requires open thinking that some don't have the energy/capacity for
-Does not confer fiscal/vocational benefit
Why American Literature, or why not?
+Similarity to Taiwan, e.g. immigrant/creole nation
+Similarity to Taiwan, e.g. slavery ~ occupation
+similarity to Taiwan, e.g. relations/conflict between creoles and aboriginals
+can help us understand modern American media (e.g. Avatar)
+can help us interrogate stereotypes presented in modern American media
+To understand Taiwan through contrasts/differences
+its educational themes, particularly the debates about "training" can be instructive for analyzing Taiwan
+Taiwanese typically analyze U.S. economy or technology but may not analyze culture even if they consume it
+to allow an informed critique of American international policy
+to allow an informed critique of "American dream" and its influence on Taiwan
+helps us recognize that "American" is a contested concept
+may improve English (or "Amerish")
+to allow an informed critique of "city on a hill" or American perfection
+helps us understand a hybridized, multicultural, colonized/postcolonized world
+helps us understand racial/ethnic conflict in other places
+for someone who wants to study literature, may as well get the benefit of foreign language practice, and NTHU foreign language department just happens to be English-dominant
+diversity of genres and perspectives in this particular national literature
+allows you to imagine yourself in the position of various different people/situations
+because Taiwan is culturally colonized by U.S.
+helps us test whether liberal/enlightenment/"human rights" rhetoric has or has not advanced from colonial relationship
+immigration and management of natural resources are also important political issues in modern Taiwan
+because Taiwanese political system is adapted from the American one, it helps to understand its origin and the challenges it has faced within the U.S.
+this particular literature seems to remove the illusion that we can study literary forms without studying historical development (as might be possible in the study of British literature)
+suggests a reform of Taiwanese/Chinese literature curriculum, to include more periods, texts, dialects
+it might actually be easier than reading classical Chinese, and it may impart some of the same historical lessons
-does not improve English
-does not necessarily help us understand actual American people
-we do not read American literature so much as a certain version of American literature decided by a teacher and publisher
Why Early American Literature, or why not?
+narratives of colonization, empire, cultural contact
-being modern people, the further we go back in history the harder it is to relate
-some of the most valuable parts are in dialect, which is even harder to read
SAMPLE ANSWER #1 (NARRATIVE FICTION, 30 POINTS)
ReplyDeleteI consider the work of Irving, Zitkala Sa and Chesnutt the most suitable samples to put together to discuss the forms and contents of narrative fiction. All the three listed writers deal with the subject of “approval,” and they all choose similar techniques: using the voices of the crowds in the story to support their main ideas. However, though they share such similarities in topics and writing methods, the form and contents of their works differ greatly from each other.
Irving wants to persuade the readers that America has its own history. To make his point more convincing, he first allows characters in folklores to show up in the Rip Van Winkle as people that really exist. Secondly, he permits the protagonist to sleep for years, making the man ignorant of all the changes that took place. That provides an opportunity for the crowds to illustrate everything that happened in a “fact-telling” tone. In other words, through this technique, Irving is able to strengthen his point by delivering voices of a crowd that witness and give approval to the history of America. Chesnutt, on the other hand, establishes the structure of his story in a different way. To express his idea that humanity or love is above racial issues, he chooses the technique of using the approving voices of crowds as a support like Irving. Nevertheless, he presents the voice as a part of a persuading process in The Wife of His Youth. To make readers think his ideas reasonable and convincing, he chooses to first present the wife in a positive manner before starting the discussion on the question of acknowledgement. He describes her as trusting (believing that Sam would not desert her), loving (taking Sam’s picture with her for twenty-five years) and perseverant. Then, when the male protagonist speaks, Chesnutt makes him start with sentences emphasizing the fidelity and devotion of the woman. That is more a leading opening than a “fact-telling” tone of speech. Chesnutt’s choice of presenting the approval of the crowds after all these arrangements makes the approval look like the conclusion of a persuasion. To make his readers persuaded by his ideas, he presents the approval of the crowd in a way varied from Irving’s.
Zitkala Sa, as the last writer to discuss, arranges the voice of the crowd in a way that is even more different than the two discussed above. Since she is to speak for her kinsmen and talk about the predicaments and difficulties that Native Americans face, she uses the first-person narrative instead of third-person narrative in The Soft-Hearted Sioux to make the emotion and controversies in her story closer and stronger to the readers. Unlike the other two writers, she does not use the approval of the crowd to support her ideas. Instead, she uses the denial and rejection of the crowds toward the male protagonist (a Native American holding the view of white people) to demonstrate her point. Her strategy is to earn the approval of readers and make them agree with her point through displaying this vivid disapproval of the crowd. All of the three writers discussed deal with the subject of “approval,” and through similar techniques of using the voice of crowd. However, as illustrated above, the form and contents in their work differ much from each other.
SAMPLE ANSWER #1 (RHETORIC/SPEECH/ESSAY/JEREMIAD 28 POINTS)
ReplyDeleteI'd like to talk about the genre “essay (or speech)” by discussing Red Jacket's Speech to the U.S. Senate, Roosevelt's American Ideals, and Marti's Our America. Despite of the fact that these three works can be categorized in the same genre, the way these three authors have their work done is quite different; this, I think, has a lot to do with their purpose of writing, their audience, their position when speaking, etc.
Speech to the U.S. Senate is a reply made by Red Jacket to Jacob Cram's claiming that “there is but one religion, and but one way to serve God, and if you do not embrace the right way, you cannot be happy hereafter.” In a case like this, being deprived of their religious freedom, the Indians are more of inferiors than equals. Therefore, how to ask something from the superior group without making it sound like begging is rather important, for “begging” at this point would somehow justifies white people's act of deprivation. Yet as an orator, Red Jacket does it tactfully. In the second paragraph, he points out that the council fire was kindled by the white and thus provides himself the source of the right to speak as an equal here.
At the very beginning of his speech, he calls on the “Great Spirit” and “HIM only.” He does not distinctly says whether the Great Spirit he calls on is referring to the Christian God or God in the Indian religions; I think he deliberately leaves this to be questioned, and the use of the word “only” here indicates even more. While the white insist there should be only one religion, Red Jacket first calls on the ambiguous Great Spirit and then emphasizes the word “only;” therefore, instead of. addressing both the white and the Indian as a group, “only” here is more likely to address them separately, and this intention to separate is easy to see throughout the whole speech. In addition, in the seventh and eighth paragraph, proposing several doubts and flaws in white people's claim, Red Jacket strongly questions them about what they've said and what they claim to be right.
PREVIOUS CONTINUED...
ReplyDeleteIn Our America, Marti, a Cuban political leader, calls on all American republics to unite and become one America. Since he is speaking to his fellow people, and he himself is one of them as well, the relationship between the author and the audience is rather equal here, which is different from Red Jacket's case; this also reflects on his way of writing--straightforward and powerful. In the last paragraph quoted, Marti says, “Our Greece must take priority over the Greece which is not ours.” This is very strong because there are no two Greeces at all, and the only “Greece” that exists is, under no circumstances, theirs. Yet the reason why he says this is simply to reinforce the idea of “ours”--whatever is “ours” should be considered first. In addition, in Our America, Marti uses a lot of allegory and symbols, and this is something that does not happen in Red Jacket's and Roosevelt's works. I think the reason why he does so is because he wants to let his readers see the whole picture of their situation, so he tries to build up the idea through all these different expressions.
Comparing with the other two, Roosevelt's language is rather grand in some way; he declares what is good and what is bad and praises as well as reproves at the same time. His style in writing American Ideals also has something to do with his purpose of this essay: to persuade people in America to give up their original identity and become true American. Though Roosevelt sticks closely to his main idea, “Americanize,” he does not explain explicitly what “Americanize” means. Instead, all he talks about is what people should and shouldn't do, what the possible results might be if they do this or that, and the disadvantages or advantages of their actions. Still, there is something in common among these three pieces of writing. The three authors all, in their writing, appeal to the element which they and their audience both have. For Red Jacket, it is the “Great Spirit;” for Marti, it is their “enemy;” and as for Roosevelt, it is the United States. By doing so, they're more likely to inspire their audience, which matters a lot since they all have their own specific purposes behind their works.
SAMPLE ANSWER #1 (SATIRE 28 POINTS)
ReplyDeleteI choose the satire to be the topic genre, and following are my texts: The Sot-weed Factory by Cooke in 1708, The Big Bear of Arkansas by Thorpe in 1841, and A Connecticut Yankee in King Arthur’s Court by Twain in1889.
Satire is a unique genre, unlike prose, poetry or fictions, it has no specific formation; it is identified by the theme of a piece of work: “criticize something such as a group of people or a system, in which you deliberately make them seem funny so that people will see their faults.” Therefore, writers can choose any form they like, or good at, to compose their satire works. Nevertheless, all the satires in history, regardless of their forms, are representing their contemporary thoughts, or issues. From the three texts, one can see the different forms of satires, and their shared properties.
Cooke’s poem was published in 1708, a time when America was still a “geographic term.” There was a big difference between people in the old world and the new world. European people thought the new world settlers were rude and stupid, while the settlers thought the European people were stick-in-the-mud. And this poem was making fun of these two values. Besides, Cooke deliberately wrote this poem in imitation of a British mock heroic narrative, Hudibras, with some inharmonic sounds in lines that makes the poem sounds funnier.
The Big Bear of Arkansas is a short story, which is known as the masterpiece of the Old Southwest humor. In the time of its publication, America was trying to establish a literature nationality. I think that is why there are many folk speeches in the story. In the story, the main character laughs the most. This can be an indication that the target of satire is the foolishness of Doggett, or the rest of the audiences. Meanwhile, this can be interpreted as the urbane people are better than the rural ones because they know when to laugh, and what to laugh at.
The last one of the three, A Connecticut Yankee in King Arthur’s Court, is the most interesting one. It has a scientific opening; however, the focus immediately turns to how the Boss makes use of his Capitalism thoughts to run King Arthur’s Court. The context of this novel is the radical transformations in society, both material and psychological. Besides, there are astonishing similarities in this novel to what happened to Hawaii at that time. Twain is both a westerner and an easterner. He had seen western and eastern America; which means, he knew this nation deeply. The capitalistic deeds of the narrator seem ridiculous in King Arthur’s time; however, why do the readers view those deeds as normal in their life? It’s because they’re accustomed to those and then forget to doubt, or even to think. Like a frog in slowly hearting water.
There is one thing the three satires shared in common: they point out their target directly. Unlike the German playwright Brecht, who wrote a play about Szechwan, China, to insinuate the contemporary German, the American writers are free to write satires without veil. As a conclusion, we can say that America is a free nation, but there are always some people who are laughed at.
SAMPLE ANSWER #1 (LYRIC POETRY 28 POINTS)
ReplyDeleteI’m going to discuss the three texts: Anne Bradstreet’s “Before the birth
of one of her children”, Phillis Wheatley’s “On the death of the Rev. Mr. George Whitefield”, and Paul Laurence Dunbar’s “When Malindy sings”. The three texts are in the form of lyric poetry. However, because they live in different time periods and due to their different race backgrounds, their writings are different in some aspects.
The text of Anne Bradstreet(1612-1672) shows her firm Puritan belief and her love for family. The main theme about the poem is “death”, which were demonstrated in a way that not so frightening. She stressed that “the sentence past is most irrevocable, / A common thing, yet oh, inevitable.” And here she used “extra foot”, which is mentioned in class, as an emotional stop. She also use phrases like “hearse” to strengthen the theme. “Death” is examined in details in this poem. Besides, she also wrote that “If any worth or virtue were in me, / Let that live freshly in thy memory.” This kind of examination of conscience is what good Puritans would always do. The white female writer could be viewed as a representative of Puritan religious writing.
Phillis Wheatley(1753-1784), who was the first published African- American
poet, writes as good as or even better than some white writers. I think that is why she could be published in London during that time period. Her works were at first rejected by American publishers. In the text, her African- American background was only implicitly revealed: “Take Him, ye Africans, He longs for you, / Impartial Savior is His title due.” In my opinion, the “Impartial Savior” here reveals her attitude that God is fair to treat people of different races. Besides, both the text and “Before the birth
of one of her children” shows the theme of “death”. The text links the death of the clergyman to the belief of Americans and particularly African- Americans, and shows the generosity and equity of God.
“When Malindy sings”, which is written by Paul Laurence Dunbar(1872-1906), shows the dialects of black people. In the text, he teased the white people in a comic way: he signifies that white people think their ability to read books and music as a biological and intellectual superiority over black people. During his time period, this kind of dialect poem earned much praise, comparing to his other conventional English poems. Besides, Dunbar was actually growing up surrounded by very few black people. Unlike Wheatley, his only contact with the days of slavery came from his parents, who were ex-slaves. While Wheatley rarely wrote about her slavery experience, Dunbar’s poems show the vivid life experience of African- Americans in his time and before.
The same thing that the three texts mentioned is God. Although the images of Him were quite different in the three texts, we could see that the three writers were all affected by their religion and put it into their poems. On the other hand, the formats of the first two poems are similar, while the third one is a dialect poem, which shows the colorful African- American language. The second text, in a contemporary sense, may be the result of white American’s enforcement, which made Wheatley to follow the rules of language and structural use of conventional English.
SAMPLE ANSWER #1 (AUTOBIOGRAPHY 28 POINTS)
ReplyDeleteAfter reading the autobiography of Benjamin Franklin’s The Autobiography, Olaudah Equiano’s The Interesting Narrative of the Life of Olaudah Equiano, or Gustavus Vassa, the African and Harriet Jacobs’ Incidents in the Life of a Slave Girl, I want to discuss the contrast between their form, and content, tone, and audience from different time periods, groups and gender.
During Enlightenment, people started to believe that they can earn the success by themselves without God, and they also realized how to use words to convey their voices. This influence reflected on those three writer’s autobiography. Being the leader of Enlightenment, Franklin liked to quote many classic masterpieces instead of quoting the lines in Bible. Equiano, who wrote for universities of slave’s rights instead of being vein to expect immortality or literary reputation, didn’t mean to embellish his work. Both Franklin and Equiano began with their writing motivation, and had a lot of interaction with their audience. However, the latest writer among three, Jacobs, has a big difference of writing style with them. Without speaking to her readers, she was much concentrated on her narration and aid dialogues in her autobiography, which made her work more vivid and novelistic.
The topics of their autobiography are totally different because of their races and audience. Franklin, as a white American in 18th, wrote his autobiography about how he strived for the success, which can represent the positive side of American. For the audience of Franklin is his son, he wrote in humorous tone, just like a family talk. On the contrast, both autobiographies of Equiano and Jacobs, which belongs to slave narrative, have the main topic of inhumanity of black slaves. Their writing is impossible to be as relax as Franklin, but full of emotional sigh and rhetorical question, which seems to arouse reader’s sympathy and introspection. I also observed that Franklin started his autobiography with the origin of his name and pedigree, while Equiano and Jacobs didn’t even mention about their parents name. Franklin wrote down his autobiography for keeping the events in his life, but Equiano and Jacobs sought to win people’s attention to human’s right through the actual horror they suffered. Their audience also changed with the different gender. Jacobs, who was sexually threatened by her master and unfree on marriage, intended to capture the attention of Northern white women in particular. By telling her life story, she tired to not only create sympathy for the slaves’ plight, but also show white women how white male debased and demoralized them through slave and use female slave to content their lust. With time changed, even the female slave was aware of women’s right and strived for it.
Although Franklin wrote his autobiography at almost the same time period with Equiano, his topic are great different with the other two writers. He is the best example of “a successful American”. The tone and audience also differed because of his race. Both Jacobs and Equiano, who belongs to black slaves, devoted their autobiography to emancipate the slave. Although their audience is a little different, the main topic is about the plight of black slaves. As a result, I think the autobiography of Jacobs and Equiano are much more the same than Franklin’s.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteSAMPLE ANSWER #2 (EQUIANO 30 POINTS)
ReplyDeleteThe text is derived from chapter three of the autobiography of Olaudah Equiano “The Interesting Narrative of the Life of Olaudah Equiano, or Gustaves Vassa, the African, Writers by Himself”. The text aims at not only conveying the fear and amazement experience of the black slave, but also expressing the cruel reality of slavery which is hard to explain and hard for blacks to understand.
The content and the choice of vocabulary reveals the unimaginable environment that black slaves live as well as the discrimination towards black slaves. The word 'poor creature' that the author uses has two main functions. One is that it denotes the discrimination of white men. Another function is that, along with the content, it captures public's attention, especially the British, which lead to further consideration of the necessity of abolition. He is shocked when witnessing the black woman who is imprisoned with the iron muzzle. He is afraid of the noise that the watch produce in that he thinks the noise will spy him and tell the master what he does incorrectly. He is afraid of the picture in the room in that he thinks the picture is staring at him. These scenes reflect the psychological condition of the author that he lives in terror all the times.
The word 'wonder' at the end of the first paragraph can be analyzed in two ways. According to on-line dictionary, the definition of 'wonder' refers to something strange and surprising. From the author's point of view, 'wonder' can be explained as something strange because he is unable to figure out why does the master have to force the black woman to wear the iron muzzle. In other words, he is shocked at this contrivance that imprisons 'people' in that way. Is it due to the fact that the master does not regard black slaves as 'people' but 'creature', or is it because the master is afraid that the black woman will leak some 'ugly truth' to others? On the other hands, the word 'wonder' can be explained as something surprising because it is curious for the author to observe the watch and the picture. Even though the author is affrighted, he is curious about the spy-like watch, for the readers might think of the possibility that maybe it is the reason why do black slaves dare not to fight for their right. Is it because of the spy watch that they will be detected prior to the movement they intend to hold? In addition, the watch can be seen as the metaphor of 'power'. This 'power' controls black slaves, and repress the desire and courage of the black slaves to go for their rights and freedom. In addition, it is also curious for the author to find out that the master/ white men has/have the same custom as the black---keeps the great men in the picture while offering them libation when they died. This assumption might makes black slaves to question that except for the complexion, what is the 'essence of difference' between the white and the black since they have the same custom towards ancestors.
PREVIOUS CONTINUED...
ReplyDeleteFurthermore, the plot that describes the author fails to talk to the books to learn how all things had a beginning reveals the unbearable and miserable destiny of black slaves. The author longs to figure out why do the black have to be white men's slave---he hopes the books can tell him since books are supposed to be the collection of human's knowledge, and people should able to get the answer and inspiration from it. However, to his disappointed, the books remain silent, which implies the fact that his question is an unexplainable puzzle that even books can not answer. The silent books also present the hopeless of black slaves, for they are not only unable to 'decode' the mystery of their destiny of slavery, but also unable to strive for their human rights as stated in the Declaration of Independence.
The passage from Equiano's autobiography clearly depicts the environment that black slaves live in, the condition they experience, and the inhuman treatment they suffer and endure. From the iron muzzle, the spy-like watch, the picture to the silent books, readers have the opportunity to realize the relationship between the white and the black as well as the importance of 'power'. Power has various manifestations. Power is the key point when accounts for the empire. All in all, power divides people into dominant and subordinate group. Having power or not decides people's destiny.
SAMPLE ANSWER #2 (DUNBAR 28 POINTS)
ReplyDelete“Frederick Douglass” is an 1895 memorial poem by African American poet Paul Laurence Dunbar (1872-1906). At the age of 23 Dunbar wrote this poem upon receiving the news of Frederick Douglass’ death on February 20, 1895, staying awake all night in order to do so. Frederick Douglass (1818-1895), a prominent American abolitionist in African American and United States history, had a close personal acquaintance with Dunbar since 1893 they started to work together in Chicago. Douglass’ firm belief in the equality of all people, whether black, Native American, or new immigrants earned Dunbar’s great respect and admiration; therefore Dunbar wrote this poem in memorial of his mentor, Douglass.
Quietly, the stanza begins Dunbar's sentimental elegy for Frederick Douglass. Here, by suggesting that the news of Douglass’ passing has led to a pause in the rushing flow of modernity. Douglass’ sudden death, for Dunbar and people who aspire emancipation, is just like “vapors obscure the sun of life” (line 4), moisturizing their eyes so much. The following mythically ‘Ethiopia’ (5) also joins the speaker of the poem in order to lament the death of one of her leading children—Frederick Douglass—shows Dunbar’s deep regret for Douglass’ passing. ‘Ethiopia’ is here to represent black people’s origin, their motherland—Africa, where the slaves Ethiopia, Dunbar and Douglass both championed (9) and comforted (10-12) in times of tough adversity. The capitalized Bondage (11) is actually refers to Slavery, which makes ‘Ethiopia’ (black people) bleed in the ‘dust’ (11) and the ‘bloody place’ (17-18)—the land where they born, they live, they suffer—United States. However, Douglass never gave up his dream of peace, as Dunbar suggests, by raising up and said as long as there was “Hope and Trust” (12), exhibiting fearlessness in his attacks upon slavery (13-18), and showing his characteristics of “no soft-tongue apologist” and “straightforward, fearlessly incowed” (19-20). Interestingly, I find the rhythm of the word ‘[t]he sunlight’ (21) and the previously mentioned ‘the sun of life’ (4) echo with each other and sounds very similar. “The sunlight of [Douglass’] truth dispelled the mist, / And set in bold relief each dark hued cloud” (21-22) indicates ‘the sunlight’ that Douglass brought to the black in the mist indeed penetrates the dark cloud of slavery, and Douglass becomes black people’s sun of life—their ‘Hope and Trust’— even for entirely different generations in the history of United States.
SAMPLE ANSWER #2 (TWAIN 28 POINTS)
ReplyDeleteIn the very beginning of the passage quoted, the Yankee declares, “Here I stand, and dare the chivalry of England to come against me--not by individuals, but in mass.” The Yankee here can be seen as an imperialist (or colonist). The fight is not a personal thing anymore; he calls on the “mass” to fight with him. Colonialism often indicates a comparatively small group of people coming to a foreign land and taking control of a rather large number of people.
Being faced with the counterattack, to whatever extents, the colonist (the Yankee) will certainly be worried, for other than their military and technology superiority, they actually have little chance to win, considering the number of people. This is also why the author says that it is “nip and tuck” with them. Also, in this passage, the author describes what the Yankee has been thinking and the change of his mentality in details: from “bluff” to worry and, finally, happiness. In addition, in the first few sentences of the fifth paragraph of this passage--“Bang! One saddle empty. Bang! another one. Bang--bang! and I bagged two”--the author intentionally uses short sentences here to create the tension and instancy of the situation, and this also gives the readers a kind of feeling as if they are watching through the Yankee's eyes when things are taking place.
Twain, in the following paragraph, gives a hint that it is not because of the Yankee's weapon or wisdom that he wins; instead, he wins because of people's “panic.” It is almost impossible to colonize without panic (or fear), for it has its own share of controlling people's mind and restraining them from rebelling. Yet after the “massacre” is done and people fled, it is rather ironic that the Yankee says “the march of civilization was begun.” Here, “civilization” and what has just happened form a great contrast.
From another point of view, the fight can also be regarded as that between the new technology and the old power, a theme often revealed throughout the whole novel. In this passage, the Yankee uses the new technology (revolvers) to kill with his own hands and kills many. To see from this perspective, through this fight, the author suggests the new will triumph over the old in the end and that science always wins. Nevertheless, this will lead to a contradiction in the end of the novel. From the beginning of the story, this is often the case that the Yankee (modern technology) seems to always have everything under his control. Yet in the end, the author seems to suggest otherwise: the new power can bring self-destruction as well, just as what happens in the end to the Yankee and his fellow soldiers.
SAMPLE ANSWER #3 (30 POINTS)
ReplyDeleteIt is interesting to ask the question this way. By this I mean instead of challenging students not to give a fawning response, the question itself deserves a challenge. I wonder whether there is a reason for us to find things “value” in a course of literature and humanities. After the industrial revolution, education has been examined under the concept of practical value. Students should learn something that is “valuable” for them to get a job in the future. If a course (or any other experience) is not valuable enough to build a better resume, it is not necessary to understand such subject. I know there is still something else beside the “practical value” within the word “value”, but I think utilitarianism, industrialism and lots of capital-related-ism has been asked us the similar question so many times in our lives: “what is the value in…?” I interrogate the way it implies and suggests student to find practical values in the subject of literature and humanities. However, I didn’t suggest that there is no practical value within the course. In fact, entering the department of foreign languages and literature in Taiwan means that you already required the ability to perform English in the four major techniques: listening, speaking, reading and writing. In other words, majoring in English literature actually equals to having a certification of English language ability in Taiwan society.
Being part of the globalized English-written literature learner, I think it is important to read the world through literary criticism and literary works. The practical function of the unpractical literary study is to find the unnamed, unfound, invisible, and interesting plight of the world.
Taiwan is a place that has been colonized and altered by the western power, and Taiwan cannot denial nor escape from the remnant of history. It is merely impossible to find the pure origin in modern days, since the history has become a “world history” through the process of colonization. The origin is no longer a nation-specific element, but a hybridity of historical remnant. The way we perceive ourselves is more and more complicated due to the combination and conflict between cultures, nations, ethnics and languages. Thus, I think we should understand the oppressor and the oppressed; the empire and the subordinated. As Aaron said in the course syllabus, that “American literature reflects the imperial problem, but it is moreover the place where empire itself is first created and where it is first challenged.” Reading Early American Literature is the first step for Taiwan students to get the idea of empire and the justification it possessed through out time and space.
PREVIOUS CONTINUED...
ReplyDeleteNot only the imperial influence has taken its place in the globe, but American dream is another form of permeant discourse. To examine our daily life carefully, the tag of “America/n” shapes the way we making choices. For example, we are used to the compact pace of Hollywood movies; there are lots of “American-English learning” classes; if the idols or stars on TV are reminded as an overseas or an “ABC”, they seems to get more attention than local artists. From Columbus, Crevecour, and Franklin to Lincoln, Jacob and Chestnutt…almost every writer we’ve read this semester performs their own American dreams. American dream, as I understand, is an ideological concept that already influenced and it has been part of Taiwanese culture. There is a kind of Taiwanese American dream occurs and embodies in our daily lives. I don’t think that we should turn against the discourse of American dreams, but we should understand ourselves in the complicated history and the intertwined thread of thoughts. The discussion we have done in class and the discussion we will have in the next semester is an opportunity for us to examine the tract that global imperialism and capitalism left in Taiwan. We are now in an English major department which is an educational institution that is severly permeated by American thinking and its ways of study; therefore, it is also our task to rebuild our own position.
We can also compare Taiwan society and American society to discuss the hybrid phenomenon of each culture. Taiwan includes different ethnic groups, besides the aboriginals and Hans, there are “new residents” immigrated from Southern-East Asia. The experience that Taiwanese people face these “new residents” can compare to the ways that American society treat the colored-ethnic groups. The reason why we would hierarchically judge other’s social status and scales of modernization is a worthwhile issue. In my understanding through this course, the means of representation is the turning point Taiwanese students can reach to examine the conflict between cultures. When one culture interacts with another culture, there is usually a transformation, a comparison and an obstacle in translation. Therefore, as a bilingual user, we can talk and even criticize the imperial ideas rather than just absorb or transmit the western intellectual documents.
SAMPLE ANSWER #3 (28 POINTS)
ReplyDeleteIf we are to discuss the effects of literature on the whole society, then I believe we have to start from each individual. Being a Taiwanese student who majors in English in Taiwan, studying early American literature becomes an interesting, or a conflicting matter to myself. We were taught about our own history and our own literature since I was 7. I’m not sure if American students are very accurate in the geographical positions of the 50 states, but almost every high school graduate in Taiwan can recognize or memorize almost all the provinces in China to their right position on the map. Let’s throw away politics for a while, but we don’t live on the mainland China anymore. We can recite classical Chinese poems or articles even if we can’t understand the whole picture at the first glance. Then why? Why do we study and memorize all these? We remember the wars that we had and the colonized era. And then we can ask ourselves, what if we don’t? What if we don’t understand the things that happened that construct our country now? We may be rootless. We may lose our individual identity. We may not know who we are. If it is too complicated for me to think for the whole group, I think of myself as a start. I have to understand what happened before in order to perceive the present, my culture and myself.
What’s the value of my studying early American literature? I see two similarities between my country and the U.S. The first so-called Americans were the descendants of the Europeans, they crossed the sea to find a new land, trying to kick off some bad conditions, but they inevitably brought their original thoughts, traditions and habits with them that may have some impact on their lives. Just like the descriptions from the authors, the descendants were struggling between the new identity and the old memories. The situation is very similar to that of Taiwan. We used to have a big land that was ours, but now we’re on a totally different, small but beautiful island abundant of many materials. The situation of slavery is a little bit like parts of our history. The slaves in the U.S. were treated badly with inhuman tools and methods, in short, they lived in inequality. And so were the colonized Taiwanese under the period of occupation by the Japanese. They were the same, treated badly and were cheap labors producing the goods and materials that the Japanese Empire needed.
I’ve never thought of myself as a literature person, and I’ve seriously thought about quitting some of the classes in my four college years, but I didn’t quit any. Reading literature gets me through history and shows me the things and the ideas that had never crossed my mind before. I get to view and understand things from a different cultural, racial, political and gender aspect. For me, literature is not only about the genres or trying to pull out the hidden implicit meaning from the sentences; it is largely about the people, the human beings and the things that we didn’t know, about ourselves. By reading early American literature, I see similarities and differences between the western, white culture and mine. I can see more about the struggle between love and power, the race and gender, the culture and the politics. I get to understand myself, and the people more.
SAMPLE ANSWER #3 (28 POINTS)
ReplyDeleteFor me, I think the greatest value in reading Early American Literature lies in the part of going through some of the most prominent readings about American Indian and African American. Before talking about that, I must admit that at the beginning of the class this semester, I did suffer a lot from those of the readings about Puritan, formal speeches and essays. Not until we move on to the part of American Indian and African American did I come back to live. In fact, I have been taking part in service clubs for years since I entered Tsing Hua University. The reason why I like to read the readings about American Indian is related to my membership of Aboriginal Service Club, which organizes activities in order to help improve the life of aboriginals in mountains of Chien Shih village, Hsing Chu County. I find American Indians and Taiwanese Aboriginals have some common ground—they are both forced to retreat from their original land due to the coming of invaders; they have been trying to record those historical events in their own perspectives; they preserve their tradition in the way of written language, which is Literature. In addition to participating in Aboriginal Service Club, I have once been to Africa to engage in volunteer work. The country we went is Tanzania, in the eastern coast of Africa in the south hemisphere, where slavery was a major activity in the 15th to 19th century. I have visited some museums of slavery in Bagamoyo, a small coastal town where once slaves were transported from inland to the coastline and then traded to Europe and America during the 15th to 19th century. The bloody history that the museums exhibited and the horrible prisons once captivated slaves therefore kept me concerning about African American very much. Having chance to read African American writes’ work in this class, therefore, is such a great opportunity that I can enrich my knowledge about how they view themselves and the society under slavery or even racism by doing close reading. Although the history is irreversible, at least now is the world where racial “discrimination” is no longer supposed to exist, whether it is to black people or to the minority group like aboriginals. As a Taiwanese university student, I think such discrimination is time to become a false illusion. Nevertheless, it is said that Mark Twain has remarked that "illusion is the only valuable thing" in the world. Just as the story Connecticut Yankee mentions, Merlin's victory reminds Yankee of the statement at the end of chapter 39—"Somehow, every time the magic of folderol tried conclusions with the magic of science, the magic of folderol got left." Here in Yankee’s eyes, Merlin seems to become a symbol of a man who needs to take refuge in a belief of illusion, which is his magic. However, I would say that nowadays people should not believe in “illusion” so much because the racial “discrimination” under the empire system has already become a false illusion accordingly. To sum up, I am looking forward to the class next semester. Without doubt, I think the greatest value in reading American Literature, is the time we have class discussion and the every moment we students and professor share together in class.