Jamaica Kincaid's Girl

Story Time

Girl by Jamaica Kincaid should be categorized as a story because it has many elements of fiction. Girl contains a beginning, middle, and end, it has conflict or tension to keep the plot moving, and it has character development which is the elements of plot and structure. 

 

Girl was a story because it demonstrates clear plot and structure. Throughout the passage, the phrase “This is how…” is used 31 times and acts as an example of structure within the story. The repetition not only works toward the flow of the writing, it also adds a sense of time. At one point it goes from ‘this is how you set the table for breakfast’ to, ‘this is how you set the table to lunch’ and then to dinner – from morning to evening and so on – showing an abstract progression of time. It progresses from a young girl learning basic skills to being a woman and fearful of being rejected in society – perhaps due to her promiscuity. The insertions of the young girls comments in italics works as a sort of conversation between her and her mother and therein creates a conflict to keep the story moving – further classifying it as a story. 

 

Girl is a story because it shows character development. Kincaid went from “Walk like a lady and not the slut,” (Kincaid p.270) early in the story to, “But what if the baker won’t let me touch the bread” (Kincaid p.271) at the end of the story. These two quotes show the character development. We see that she was fearful she had become the slut she was warned against. This example also shows time progression because the girl has gone from young to adult. Throughout the passage the girl only makes two remarks. Her first remark was about how she doesn’t even sing the song her mother was telling her not to sing in Sunday school. It is clear to the reader the girl felt her mother didn’t even need to be warning her – it was rebellious sounding in a way. The first italicized comment Kincaid used was to show the reader the girl does not want to take the advice of the speaker – she does not feel it applies to her. Contrary to Kincaid’s second use of italics at which time the girl shows a mark of fear in her remark. The reader can infer the girl should have taken the speakers advice all along. 

 

Girl has a clear beginning, middle, and end and shows character development. The story is about a little girl, a daughter, – in Sunday school and learning how to sew – and the mother is the one telling the story. The reader may infer that the story is actually about the author. The story also is a discussion about how mothers and daughters interact in society. Sociologically speaking, the girl is being trained on how to properly conduct herself by some authority figure – most likely, her mother.

©February 2012

Lorraine Hansberry's A Raisin in the Sun

Hansberry's United Chicago Family

A Raisin in the Sun, released in 1959, is a story of a family standing in the face of racial segregation in Chicago's south side. The main character, Walter Lee Younger is a money hungry man desperate to take control of his family but nothing seems to go his way. Mama Lena gets a $10,000 insurance check for her husbands death and makes the decision to move the family from their apartment to a nice 3 bedroom on Clybourne street as Walter's wife, Ruth, finds out she is pregnant. Unexpectedly, they are unwelcome from the predominantly white neighborhood and offered a settlement to not move in – also referred to as a buyout. Lorraine Hansberry, the author of Raisin in the Sun, encountered a similar encounter as a child growing up in Chicago. Although race is a significant factor in A Raisin in the Sun, the theme of family unity seems to be stressed more.

Hansberry's family history plays a huge part in the writing of her play. Hansberry grew up with her family on the south side of Chicago. Her father took it upon himself to push the limits of segregation at the time and buy a house in a primarily white neighborhood. When living there, “a mob gathered outside their home, and a brick, thrown through a window, barely missed her before embedding itself in a wall,” (Lederer 1). Later, he appealed to the Supreme Court. From an early age, Hansberry saw the racial discrimination issues around her and the issues, seemingly, were embedded in her head going forward. Comparably, her story of A Raisin in the Sun is about a black family trying to better their lives by moving into a nicer home in a white neighborhood and are unwelcome. In the story, the Younger's joke that Lindner's visit to pay them off is the “welcoming committee,” (Hansberry 1337). She based the story off her own experiences. Beneatha, Walter's sister, is supposedly her imitation of herself. When her father passed away, it has been said that Hansberry was further motivated to carry out his dreams of equality within society amongst blacks and whites. Hansberry, then, had plenty of inspiration and background to use in her story depicting racial segregation. 

Hansberry father hugely influenced her as far as being politically active and he also played a huge role in her writing of the play. Drawing from her own life, the Younger family set themselves to move to Clybourne Street. “Her first play, A Raisin in the Sun, directly engages segregation struggles in Chicago as a penultimate symbol of black oppression and resistance. In doing so, she brought local, individual struggles of African Americans – against segregation, ghettoization, and capitalist exploitation – to the national stage,” (Gordon 121). Just as her father attempted to make a change in the tense racial climate of the 1960's, Hansberry used her story to make a very strong, and easily seen, point. Audiences would see the play and feel sympathy for the Younger's. Even at the time it was released it was well received. Her father died shortly after his appeal with the Supreme court and his political incline seems to have lived on through his daughter. Gordon later comments, “...public testimony about urban black life, to represent her radically expansive notion of the real, and to provide a prophetic framework for anti-racist, anti-colonialist movements...” (122). Her play stood as a reference point – it was the backbone of segregation talks giving each side a place to begin a much needed conversation. But despite the fact that the plays central point was segregation, it is also true that Hansberry held no discriminatory stances and she felt family unity was more of a point to make. 

The conversation about segregation and discrimination could go on for miles but in the story, Hansberry stereotypes as well as defies them. “I shall have to teach you how to drape it properly...You wear it well...mutilated hair and all,” (Hansberry 1311). Asagai has brought Beneatha back some robes from Nigeria and is teasing her about how she doesn't know how to wear them. He later goes on to imply Beneatha has forgotten her heritage and taken on the Western ways of America. Asagai is under the assumption Beneatha does not know how to drape the robes because she is from America and surely, to him, American women are all naive to their heritages. She gets offended but the scene brings up an interesting discussion. Hansberry has stereotyped black women through Asagai's point of view, but also she has stereotyped African men who judge American black women. Here it is seen that Hansberry doesn’t only equate stereotypes and racial impressions to the white male – as it may have been assumed. She has made a point that the white man is the not the enemy anymore than a greedy black man (Willy Harris) or a 'typical colored woman' (1298).

Hansberry uses the example of a colored woman's hair to point out how blacks at the time were unsure of how to act not only because of how whites treated them but also how they treated each other. George – Beneatha's well-to-do male, black suitor – comments on her hair when she decides to cut it off (Hansberry 1320). “What have you done to your head – I mean your hair!” and she responds, “Nothing – except cut it off. . . that's up to George. If he's ashamed of his heritage-” Beneatha yells back that she hates assimilationist Negroes and the conversation goes on. What was Hansberry getting at? She wanted to draw attention to the way blacks, particularly black women, were viewed in society. Their hair, unlike white women, was called “nappy” but as Asagai pointed out, black woman mutilate their hair daily just to look like the white woman – per say. She is now pointing out a problem with black men from America who don't appreciate their heritage and talk down on black women who appreciate it.“A Raisin in the Sun is a moving drama about securing one's dignity within a system that discriminates against, even enslaves, its racial minorities,” (Adler 1). Beneatha first attempts to secure her dignity with Asagai by changing her hair but then she has to justify herself to George the very next minute. Hansberry shows how the system is trapping people into fitting a certain type of mold. Perhaps Hansberry, basing Beneatha off herself, felt these restraints in society as she was raised. The discussion, then, is raised if black woman should or shouldn't be changing how they look. Is it their responsibility to uphold their traditional African hair or is it okay for them to change it? Arguably, at the time, it may have helped a black family fit into a white neighborhood if they did change their hair. Contrary wise, and proving that segregation was potentially a less significant point of the play, Hansberry shows how blacks, in addition to whites, were making life difficult for themselves. They were judging one another; some were trying to conform and be more white while others were trying to hold onto their heritage and be more black. Hansberry has pointed out the double edged sword the blacks faced simply waking up in the morning and deciding how to get ready – a basic daily routine. 

Hansberry uses the discussion of moving to Clybourne park to touch on how whites treated blacks. “Clybourne Park? Mama, there ain't no colored people living in Clybourne Park,” (Hansberry 1326). Although the family is unwelcome due to the color of their skin, Hansberry – just as her father did when she was a child – is making a dramatic point. The Younger's know they are not welcome but when Lindner comes to talk of their being unwelcome, they act out of pride and tell him to get out. Welcome or not, the house on Clybourne is what they can afford and it is what the family needs, especially with a new baby on the way. “...Lindner is far from an admirable character, it is a black man, Willy Harris, who is the real villain of the piece,” (McGovern 3). Lindner acts in thinking he is doing a kind thing. His intentions are to warn the family as well as protect what the neighborhood holds sacred. Of course Lindners actions are discriminatory and just plain rude but in comparison to what Willy Harris did it is impossible to say Hansberry's point was to show how the whites treated the blacks unfairly. Lindner offers them money, and for a moment Walter seriously considers taking him up on the offer after his business partner, Willy Harris, runs off with all the money Mama gave him. Here it is most clearly demonstrated that Hansberry is not discriminating any one race - rather she is pointing out flaws within society as a whole. “In buying the house in Clybourne Park, Mama asserts her family's right to refute the economic exploitation of Chicago segregation,” (Gordon 127). It is a smart move for her family. Mama is doing what she thinks is best. Their current living quarters has rats and roaches and Travis doesn't even have his own bedroom – he has to sleep on the couch. There is not enough room for them, the conditions are terrible, and the family is still expanding. “...a white family could rent a five-room apartment for $60 a month on Cicero, for example, a black South side family of four could pay $56 per month to live in one half of a two room flat, infested with rats and roaches...” (Gordon 125). For the Youngers, this economic difference was essential. At one point, Ruth desperately pleads with Mama saying they can all get jobs to help pay for the house as opposed to not being able to move. In the play, the family is not moving to the house on Clybourne street to start a ruckus or make a statement – they are moving there our of necessity and for the well-being of their family. Hansberry is showing that any action, no matter how small or unintended, was blown way out of proportion because of the political climate. 

Thus far, the plays purpose appears mostly to demonstrate racial discrimination but underlying that theme, Hansberry stresses the importance of family unity. “A Raisin in the Sun deals with two problems: the discords of family with high hopes, and the social injustice of segregation,” (Brantingham 2). It is interesting to note that Brantingham says first Hansberry stresses family unity and next is the topic of segregation – as if the plays actual purpose was to display family unity and the context was racial segregation. Walter Lee Younger is desperate to be the head of the household and to have the finances to back him up. He naively hands over all his money to Bobo and Willy hoping they can help him achieve his financial goals. When Willy runs off with their money, Walter has a sort of break down. He wants to beg Lindner to give them the money back for their new house but the rest of the family does not agree. Ruth's only desire is getting into that house and having space for her unborn child. Mama wants to give Travis (Walter and Ruth's son) a yard to play in. When Mama hears Walter wants to beg for the money, she becomes irate. The only other time we see Mama get this angry is when Beneatha announces she believes God has done nothing for her and Mama makes her say God is in her house (Hansberry 1307). Mama rebukes Walter for thinking the way he does and says his father, her late husband, would be ashamed and he has disgraced his name. When Lindner arrives Mama says Travis is to stand next to Walter so he can see what his father is doing. “We have decided to move into our house because my father—my father—he earned it for us brick by brick. We don’t want to make no trouble for nobody or fight no causes, and we will try to be good neighbors. And that’s all we got to say about that. We don’t want your money.” (1353). A shift occurs in Walter at this point – his priorities are rearranged. Money is bumped down on the list and the families well-being takes center stage. Despite being stripped of money, despite Lindner's warnings, and despite his pride, Walter decides to move the family because he is now only concerned for what is in their best interest rather than his own. Here, Hansberry is making it glaringly clear that family is the number one thing to be concerned about. Despite the racial climate and the issues with money, family unity shines through. 

 

The success of him financially or culturally is no longer his top concern – rather, leading his family and taking care of the household is. His initial dreams of money and status are deferred but new dreams of well-being for his family have taken priority. Looking forward, it is not assumed Walter will be miserable in the new house as he was in the current one. The reader cannot picture him complaining about eggs and his dreams being ignored anymore – his dreams are now being fulfilled in the well being of his family.“...for certainly this is a play about a mother-son relationship, but is no less a play about dreams too long deferred,” (Washington 2). Beneatha's dream is to become a doctor and to her that was set in stone until her suitor, Asagai, came through and made her think otherwise. Beneatha was down about Walter squandering away all her tuition and Asagai came and delivered her a speech. “Then isn’t there something wrong in a house—in a world—where all dreams, good or bad, must depend on the death of a man?” (Hansberry 1346). Here he puts things into perspective. Unlike Beneatha, Asagai is looking towards his dream knowing the struggles that lie ahead. Beneatha, upon receiving one set back, has given up. He leaves Beneatha with the notion of leaving with him to Africa and tending to people there – he has helped her reshape her dream just as Walter reshaped his. “Murchison offers Beneatha a life of opulence and comfort, while Asagai offers her a life shaped in ancestral tradition but devoid of creature comforts,” (Washington 2). She has to decide which dream she wants to follow. This relates to Hansberry's earlier point – that society had cornered them and it was no longer clear which was right and which was wrong. In America Beneatha's obvious choice would be George Murchison but her love for her heritage would most likely incline her to choose Asagai. 

 

A Raisin in the Sun by Lorraine Hansberry is a story about family unity, racial segregation, and triumph. She used her history as a backdrop for the play and, with any luck, to make a statement as her father always meant to. Going forward, Hansberry may hope the discussion will carry on and make a difference – but looking at society today its questionable. She made the point that it is not one race versus the other as much as it is everyone trying to fit in amongst one another – the selfish, the greedy, the judgmental, and the caring. It's kill or be killed (or in the case of Walter and Willy Harris, its steal or be stolen from). Colored women still 'mutilate' their hair and racial tensions still exist, though we've come a long way. The ending of the play with family becoming the top priority stands true even today. Especially in the current economic down turn where all anyone has is the support of those around them – the meaning behind her play is still relevant. “...she offers her audience a model of hope and perseverance and shows the commonality of human aspirations, regardless of color,” (Lederer 3). Hansberry shows that despite economic struggles and racial discrimination, there is still something good to look to. Again, particularly in today's downward pointed economy, the play is still as relevant as ever. Racial discrimination may not be as much of an issue but Chicago's south side is still known for being ghetto and poor. Cabrini Green, an extremely slummed city in Chicago, was recently torn down and all the families were displaced to try to rebuild the community and give the families a fresh start. Much controversy arose as the families were placed in new apartment complexes throughout Chicago – some families complained their property value would decrease because the new residents wouldn’t uphold their properties. This fear was also acknowledged by Lindner when he was trying to discourage the Younger's from moving to Clybourne Street. “The play also confronts the problems of racial integration that African Americans faced throughout the twentieth century,” (Tackach 3). The play is still relevant today. Some new takes on issues discussed throughout the play have taken shape in recent years.

In 2009 actor/comedian came out with a documentary called “Good Hair” which focused on black woman's hair. In the film, Chris Rock is surveying people, particularly women of color, about their hair. He visits a hair convention in Atlanta, travels to India, and visits many salons central to the black community. He talks about sodium hydroxide which is a toxin used to relax hair. He talks about the ceremonies done in India to get the hair for wigs and he also talks about who gets the money for these expensive wigs. At one point, Rock asks some black woman's men if they are allowed to touch their womans hair and the answer is no. It's interesting to relate this documentary to the scenes Hansberry used with Beneatha, George, and Asagai. Forty years later the discussion is still a hot topic.

The bottom line is, racial discrimination still exists though, perhaps and hopefully, not to the same degree as it did when Hansberry wrote the play. Society has come a long way in accepting each other as equals, but people still argue, judge, and stereotype everyone – even those of their same race. Hansberrys play seemed not to point fingers at white people only – as that too would be discriminatory and stereotypical. Instead, she points the finger at anyone opposed to the well-being of the Younger family; Willy Harris and Lindner. Lorraine Hansberry expressed the idea that race was less of a factor and family unity was more important through the use of her personal history in her play A Raisin in the Sun.

 © December 2011

Manifest Destiny

Senses of Entitlement

Before the Civil War, Americans started moving westward and this expansion became known as “Manifest Destiny – a term coined by, journalist, John O. Sullivan. Between the 1840's and 1860's, known as the Antebellum Era, growth was abundant economically, socially, and industrially for Americans and their national pride grew strong. The Romantic Era contributed to drawing people westward through inspirational art and writings. Many other factors, some justified and others not so much, contributed to this rapid migration. The Gold Rush, the fertile Mexian soil and the cotton kingdom all played major roles in westward expansion. The question is were the thoughts and/or actions of certain Americans, such as Andrew Jackson and James K. Polk justified? Arguably, America was bound to move westward, but did God ordain them to or did they just feel entitled to the land? Westward expansion brought about progress but at the high cost of many values and Native American lives and therefore the movement could not have been ordained by God and should most accurately be described as entitlement gone too far. Manifest Destiny is a betrayal to Americas ideals because it betrayed some individuals rights to equality, justice, and freedom in the process.

Americans felt they were destined to the westward lands and felt a pressure to claim them before Great Britain or anybody else, rather, had a chance. “What friend of human liberty, civilization, and refinement, can cast his view over the past history of the monarchies and aristocracies of antiquity, and not deplore that they ever existed?” (O'Sullivan, 3). They feared the monarchs would encroach on the land before they had a chance and that America would end up the same as other aristocratal societies. He goes on to say, “the nation of many nations is destined to manifest to mankind the excellence of diving principles. . . equality of rights. . . equality of individuals. . . freedom of conscience, freedom of person...” (O'Sullivan, 4). These rights that O'Sullivan speaks of are the foundation of America; they are the values laid out for the country and Manifest Destiny betrayed them all. Directly stated in the Preamble of the United States Constitution, it reads: “We the people of the United States, in order to form a more perfect union, establish justice, insure domestic tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general welfare, and secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity,” (Cornell Law School). Manifest desinty put the white man and his goals ahead of all other which is seen with the Indians, the Mexicans, and the African Amerian slaves. “Indians, Mexicans, and Filipinos became merely obstacles in the path to a better world,” (Torr, 94). Equality and general welfare were only considered for the dominant, white race. Anyone else were obstacles – just problems needed to get around or move out of the way.

The Indian Removal Act of 1830, under President Andrew Jackson, gave him power to negotiate removal options with the Indians already occupying the land – the Cherokee, Creek, Choctaw, Chicasaw and Seminole tribes. Jackson wanted to use their home lands to develop cotton industries. “I suggest for your consideration the propriety of settling apart an ample district west of the Mississippi...to be guaranteed to the Indian tribes as long as they shall occupy it...” (Jackson, 2). The Cherokee were an established tribe and were not willing to just sit back and be treated so unfairly. They went to the Supreme Court, who eventually ruled in their favor, but the ruling was ignored and the Cherokee, like the other Indian tribes, were forced to leave their homes. Over 46,000 Indians were removed and forced to migrate. The path the Cherokee took in their migrations became known as “The Trail of Tears” because of how horrifying and upsetting it was to have to leave their homes. Chief Seattle, the leader of the Suquamish and Duwamish tribes, wrote, “...but why should I mourn at the untimely fate of my people? Tribe follows tribe, and nation follows nation, like the waves of the sea. It is the order of nature, and regret is useless. Your time of decay may be distant, but it will surely come, for even the White Man whose God walked and talked with him as friend to friend, cannot be exempt from the common destiny,” (chief Seattle, 9). The growth of the cotton kingdom was made possible by the removal of Indians and America prospered greatly but that same progress cost America values and many Native American lives.

Texans desire for independence spring-boarded the countries debate over slavery. “In the 1840s Manifest Destiny was used to justify war with Mexico for control of Texas; in the years that followed it was used to justify war with American Indians,” (Torr, 96). The war with Mexico is a strong example of how Manifest Destiny betrayed the values of equality and justice that Americans laid out in their constitution.

“In 1833, General Antonio Lopez de Santa Anna made himself ruler of Mexico. Santa Anna believed in strong central power. Late in 1835, he declared a new constitution that put the national government firmly in charge. Many Texans resented this move. On December 20, 1835, a group of Texans met and declared their wish to become independent from what they called Santa Anna's illegal government.” (Anderson 39-40).

Anderson goes on to explain how the anti-slavery northerners did not want to annex Texas because Texas was a slave state and southerners tempers heightened at the prospect of slavery limitations. “The Panic of 1837 caused tens of thousands of Americans to lose their farms in the South and their factory jobs in the North, and scores of settlers and adventurers poured into Texas,” (Wexler, 118). With so many Americans now living in Texas, and few of them pleased with the rulings of General Antonio Lopez, they sought after annexation. The Mexican government was not pleased when “new secretary of state, John C. Calhoun, negotiated an annexation treaty with Texas,” (Woodworth 4). Mexico saw the annexation as hostile.The tensions over Texas and a disagreement over borders between the Nueces River and the Rio Grande led to what is now known as the Mexican-American War. It was the first war over land and was driven by the idea that America had a right to Mexicos land. Many called this “Polks War” because it was president Polk who was the driving force behind it as he is the one who sent troops initially.

“Some favored it because they felt Mexico had provoked the war or because they felt it was the destiny of America to spread blessings of freedom to oppressed people. Others opposed the war. Some, primarily Polk's political enemies the Whigs, accused the President of having provoked it. Others, generally northern abolitionists, saw in the war the work of a vast conspiracy of southern slaveholders greedy for more slave territory,” (Woodworth, 12). 

 

After an ugly war with 15,000 US casualties and 50,000 mexican casualities, the US managed to acquire half of Mexico (our current California, and New Mexico states). The Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo was the result of the war and stated that Mexico handed over the northern land – our current California, New Mexico, Arizona, Utah, and Nevada states -to the U.S. Afterwards, many Americans remained unsatisfied because they wanted all of Mexico. Americans, at the time, felt entitled to more land and evidently were willing to go to extreme measures, such as war, to attain it. “And while race imposed no political distinctions, there was an 'aristocracy of color,'” (Servin 14). Servin points out that although race was not exaclty in the discussion, persay, as Manifest Destiny took place, it was still there and it still played a vital role. He went on to explain that certain prejudices came off a lot stronger in the Mexican territories during the late 1840's. The war with Mexico is a prime example of the power of manifest destiny and a clear visual of how it betrayed the American values of equality. “Why should we precipitate this fearful struggle, by continuing a war the results of which must be to force us at once upon it? Sir, rightly considered, THIS is treason,” (Corwin 7). In Thomas Corwins speech against the Mexican-American War, he called Americans out on the dissconnect between the principles the country was founded on and the actions taking place through manifest destiny.

Another location the Americans sought after was Oregon due to rumors of good soil and climate. President Polk, believing the agriculture wasn't good enough, did not promote any interest in the travels to Oregon but Andrew Jackson supported the Indian Removal Act of 1830. Still, many flocked there expecting land and patriotism or hoping to convert the Native Americans to Christianity. “During the first half of the 1840's, some 6000 Americans had taken the 2000-mile, six-month journey on the Oregon trail...” (Woodworth 6). The general outlook on it was for the natives to either assimilate or migrate – whether or not the white migrants would allow the natives to stay if they assimilated is another question. One of the grandest migrations, dubbed “The Great Migration,” in Americas history took place on the Oregon Trail, but it was an exhausting trek and many arrived with little to start off with. Oregon, at the time of this great migration, was still a land claimed by Great Britain so Polk decided to lay claim to that land as well. “They agreed on a border along the 49^th Parallel, that was farther north than the British wanted and farther south than Polk had claimed,” (Anderson 43). The Oregon Trail directly contributed to westward expansion because so many commuted there, believing the land was rightfully theirs, that President Polk had to claim it as such. The Oregon Treaty resulted, claiming Oregon as all land below the 49^th parallel. In later months, the trail would expand with a route veering towards Califronia which in turn contributed to the large migration westward sparked by the findings of gold. 

 

The Mormans also took part in Westward expansion being that they accounted for a large number of indivduals migrating together seeking religious freedom. Mormans, members of a religion founded by Joseph Smith, often found themselves mistreated in their neighborhoods. Many Americans disliked their religion and disrespected their beliefs in, primiarily, polygomy so they followed Smith around seeking a more peaceful place to live. “...Mormons, often in trouble with their neighbors, had been forced to migrate to Kirtland, Ohio; Clay Country, Missouri; and finally, Nauvoo, Illinois. There, on the banks of the Mississippi River, they built the largest city in the state...” (Woodworth 8). Eventually, Smith was arrested and later killed by intruders in his jail, and the Mormons new leader, Bringham Young, led them out of the United States. According to Woodworth, in 1846, 85,000 Mormons followed Young to their new city westward in, then Mexico, and present-day Utah. 

 

In the second half of the 1840's, California, or Alta California as it was then called, became the new hot spot for westward migration. Mexico granted the Alta Californian land to both Mexican and foreign immigrants in the late 1840s but the Mexican-American war expanded to that region and soon would fall into American hands. John Sutter, an immigrant who received a land grant and developed agricultural trade with it made quite the discovery after asking his construction supervisor, James Marshall, to find a location for a sawmill. “On January 24, 1848, a mere nine days before the treaty ending the war with Mexico would be signed, Marshall discovered gold nuggets among the debris...” (Lloyd 16). Many Americans who migrated seeking quick riches were sorely disappointed. Few who took the expensive trip to California even broke even after finding gold and even fewer found gold and became rich over night, as was the dream. “As immigrants poured into California in search of gold, cities and towns were forced to grow quickly to accommodate them,” (Lloyd 140). Through the westward migration, the country grew socially, economically, and industrially. Although the finding of gold was extraordinary, to say the least, it also prompted more arguments than possibly any other westward migration had, thus far.

“The question of slavery's status in the western territories was made more immediate when, on January 24, 1848, gold was discovered at Sutter's Mill, not far from Sacramento, California. The next year gold-seekers from the eastern U.S. and from many foreign countries swelled California's population from 14,000 to 100,000” (Woodworth, 19).

Southerners took their ways of life westward as cottom began to transform their economy. Many southern slave oweners migrated west to set up cottom plantations on new, cheap land and they brought their slaves with them. Northerners shipped and traded the cotton which tied the two economies together but the disagreements the northerners and southerners had on the issue of slavery would eventually tear the country apart. Slavery not only remained a hot-button issue as extreme westward migrations and expansions took place, it became an intolerable disagreement throughout the country. “Under its [the fugitive slave law] provisions blacks living in the North and claimed by slave catchers were denied trial by jury and many of the other protections of due process,” (Woodworth, 28). This law heated the debate over slavery. Cotton development helped develop the South as it gave financial power and strength to the southerners, it became the source of social and cultural authority, and it tied the South to the nations economy. Cotton development had other effects too: it created distinctions and divided the country and it gave smaller farmers the idea they could get plantations and prosper so many relocated and brought their slaves with them, initiating a domestic slave trade in the nation. 

 

Some Americans opposed Westward expansion. The Whig Party members were the foremost opposers of expansionism ideas. The northern Whig party members seemed to be aware that westward expansion would only reopen the discussion of slavery and territorial boundary lines. David Wilmot, a democratic congressman, proposed that all states acquired through the Mexican-American war be initiated as slave-free states. This was called the 'Wilmot Proviso.'

“In fact, by the 1840s virtually all destinarian thought entailed implicit or explicit references to 'race.' A proliferation of pseudoscientific theories of race in the Western world at the time generated . . . This discourse accomplished two things, in our context. First, it gave rise to a widening movement in the North not only to eliminate slavery but also to remove blacks from the republic of freedom through colonization schemes, curtailment of the rights of free blacks, or even the annexation of Texas as an aqueduct for 'drainage' of blacks southward into the presumably more climatically suitable tropics. The Wilmot Proviso was only one expression of this vision,” (Stephanson 55).

 

As Stephanson points out, racism was a strong underlying issue that took the forefront through Manifest Destiny, and not to our pride. America was a country founded on the ideals of freedom and equality and manifest destiny betrayed those ideals in an attempt to gain power and prestige as a new nation.

The 1850's proved to be a trying time for the nation. The Compromise of 1850 an attempt to stop controversy over slavery. “The Compromise of 1850 could only delay the inevitable separation of North and South,” (Wexler, 178). The Kansas-Nebraska Act allowed the states to use popular sovereignty to determine if they were slave states or free states. The compromises that took place were unacceptable to most southerners and they were extremely dissatisfied because they wanted to see slavery expand, not recede. Stephen A. Douglas, from Illinois, created the idea. Initially it was created to expand midwestern trade routes with a railroad (preferably, to Douglas, straight through his home state of Illinois).

“The construction of the railroads brought income to western residents... facilitated western colonization and settlement... stimulated the development of cattle grazing, mining, and other industries... and... made it profitable to locate factories nearer to the sources of raw materials and encouraged the development of western manufacturing activities,” (Torr, 152).

In order for the railroad to run through Chicago, the land west of Iowa and Missouri had to be determined and organized. Upon voting time, Missourians claimed land with a pro-slavery status and swarmed Kansas' elections. “Southern Democrats seized the opportunity to acquire more slave-holding territory when the Kansas-Nebraska bill was presented...” (Wexler, 178). Kansas, who had been closed to slavery since the Missouri Compromise in 1820, was overtaken by both pro- and anti-slavery efforts and a bloody civil war broke out. Over 150 violent deaths took place as well as 500 rapes.The act was an awful failure and basically over turned the Missouri Compromise of 1820 and the Compromise of 1850 as well as pointed the nation towards further civil war. 

 

Westward expansion came about from many arenas such as settlement in Oregon, the war with Mexico over Texas, and the California gold rush. Primarily democrats championed the ideaology of Manifest Destiny, being that they sought power and prestige as a newly developed nation. Throughout the 1820's-1860's, many attempts were made by Americans to migrate westward and establish new territories. In the process of expanding, many, native americans, mormons, mexicans, slaves, and southerners, chose or were forced to migrate. The Native Americans, Mexicans, and slaves took the hardest beating and are easily victims of this idea that American was destined to expand westward. It would seem, though most likely ill-intended, that expanding westward became a primary pre-cursor to the Civil War. The disagreements and tensions that arose between the North and South over the issues of slavery took over all national pride and patriotism. Greed and false senses of entitlement overtook many Americans. To this day, immigration is still a tense issue in America. The discussion of illegal immigrants is particularly relevant, ironically, with the Mexicans coming to America. Ironic because roughly only 50 years ago it was Americans trying to migrate into Mexican territory; the Mexicans offered Americans land grants but America wanted to claim the land and started a war over it. In the Constitution of the United States, written in 1787, the founding fathers wrote that all should be considered equal yet continuing to 2012, America still struggles with these ideals.Thus, Manifest Destiny was a direct betrayal to American ideals.

 ©May 2012

Works Cited

Anderson, Dale. Westward Expansion. Austin, TX: Raintree Steck-Vaughn, 2001. Print.

Buhle, Mari J., Daniel Czitrom, and Susan H. Armitage. "The Territorial Expansion of the United States 18302-1850s." Out of Many: A History of American People. By John M. Faragher. Harper ed. Vol. 1. Boston, MA: Pearson, 2012. 362-424. Print.

"Indian Removal." PBS. PBS. Web. 28 Apr. 2012. <http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/aia/part4/4p2959.html>.

Lloyd, J. D. The Gold Rush. San Diego: Greenhaven, 2002. Print.

Reznicek. M. Research Paper Packet – Manifest Destiny. HST 111-065. Spr. 2012. Harper College.

Servín, Manuel P. The Mexican-Americans: An Awakening Minority. Beverly Hills: Glencoe, 1970. Print.

Stephanson, Anders. Manifest Destiny: American Expansionism and the Empire of Right. New York: Hill and Wang, 1995. Print.

Torr, James D. The American Frontier. San Diego, CA: Greenhaven, 2002. Print.

"U.S. Constitution." LII. Web. 01 May 2012. <http://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution/>.

Wexler, Sanford. Westward Expansion: An Eyewitness History. New York: Facts on File, 1991. Print.

Woodworth, Steven E. The Essentials of United States History: 1841-1877 Westward Expansion and the Civil War. Piscataway, NJ: Research and Education Association, 2002. Print.

Knock at a Star

On Sectioning Poetry

Knock at a Star by X. J and Dorothy M. Kennedy is a fresh, inspired compilation of children's poetry that introduces and challenges it's readers. Most poems in the book are unique and essential to include , but a few could be left out or better explained. While“Canis Major” by Robert Frost is creative, clear, and inspirational, “Poor” by Myra Cohn Livingston sends a message to the reader that is unclear and potentially harmful to a young audience. Other poems, such as “In Just-” by E.E. Cummings, “Narcissa” by Gwendolyn Brooks, and “Two People” by Eve Merriam offer the reader lessons in acceptance and creativity. While it is very important for a young reader to understand and enjoy poetry, it can also be detrimental to them if the poetry sends the wrong message. Poems that are too complex or to preachy also don't tend to win over the younger audiences. Knock at a Star offers many types of poetry for many age groups and strives to enhance the readers experience with poetry by offering poems that, ideally, the reader can find meaning of their own in. But, are the included poems best served according to the section they're under? Are the poems clear and creative? For the most part, yes. Through consulting with the texts: Essentials of Children's Literature, Mooring Against the Tide, and PoetryFoundation.org, one is able to show how Knock at a Star is a creative and clear compilation of unique poetry for children that will continue to be relevant for years to come.

“Canis Major” by Robert Frost is placed under the section, Beats That Repeat. “In a good poem, the rhythm – wheather regular or changing – goes along with what the poet is saying in it” (86). Frost's poem has a rhyme scheme of ABCB, DEFE, GHAH and implores the use of masculine rhyme which is when “two words end with the same vowelconsonant combination” (Knorr, Schell 42). Masculine would probably be a favorite to young readers because it's simple and direct. The second verse reads: “He dances upright, All the way to the west, And never once drops, On his forefeet to rest.” (88). West and rest are the masculine rhyme; Additionally, Frost varies the beats that repeat by changing the meters within each line so different words are emphasized. The beat and rhyme scheme of this poem add to the message of it. The emphasized words in the above verse would be upright, way, west, never, drops, feet, and rest. When read aloud, the reader will emphasize these words. When broken down, it may sound like this: Ta (he) Ta (dances) Dum (upright) Ta (all) Ta (The) Dum (way) Ta (to) Ta (the) Dum (West), Ta (and) Dum (never), Ta (once) Dum (drops), Ta (on) Ta (his) Dum (Forefeet), To (to) Dum (rest). By using this meter, Frost is able to draw emphasis to the words that add meaning to the poem. 

 

The poem's meaning may be behind what an Overdog actually is. “The great Overdog” (line 1) is referring to the constellation in the sky, Canis Major; this is positively the case as the title of the poem indicates. The “star in one eye” (line 3) is referring to the star Sirius which is the brightest star in the sky. When the great overdog “gives a leap in the east” (4), it is referring to the constellation moving from east to west in the night sky. The “poor underdog” can be taken as the speaker of the poem literally sitting underneath the sky which contains the great Overdog, as well as it can mean the speaker is an underdog in the sense of being one who is at a disadvantage. “Yet, just as Frost is aware of the distances between one man and another, so he is also always aware of the distinction, the ultimate separateness, of nature and man” (poetryfoundation.org). The underdog is separate from the Overdog; he is not normally one with nature/God. When the underdog barks, the poem takes on an inspirational meaning. It sends the message: even though he's just a poor underdog, in this moment and at this time he is at one or, at least, bonding with the great Overdog and has the power to bark; he has the motivation to yell out his support or praise. If the great Overdog is assumed to be a higher being – which can be inferred by the use of capitalizing Overdog - then the underdog is a mortal and in a state of worship or communion with the great Overdog.

The message this sends to a child, then, is that it's okay and beautiful, actually, to have this connection with the great Overdog/God. Frost wrote: “I'm a poor underdog, But tonight I will bark” (lines 9-10), as if to say the underdog is at one with nature and in harmony with God. The rhyme scheme in the poem natural to read; when read aloud, the words just slip off the tongue. This adds to the poems meaning because it can be inferred that just as the poem is read naturally, the meaning of the poem, too, should come naturally. Frost may be saying communion and comfort in God and/or nature should come naturally. 

 

“In Just-” by E. E. Cummings is a creative, whimsical poem characterized under the Word Play section. The poem effectively deals with the topic of injustice towards, primarily, age discrimination and growing up. This type of theme was fairly common for Cummings. “Though his poetic language was uniquely his own, Cummings' poems were unusual because they unabashedly focused on such traditional and somewhat passe poetic themes as love, childhood, and flowers” (poetryfoundation.org) Cummings points out how unfair it is that the children in the poem continue to play while the balloonman must continue working. He “also discovered the joy of inventing new words. E. E. Cummings, in a poem about spring, applies such a new words to the wet earth that little kids dabble in after a rainstorm: mud-luscious. . . In word play, the results can surprise poet and reader. At its best, such word play can be exciting as a fast game of street hockey, as suspenseful as the next move in a game of chess” (101). As in the case with “In Just,” the poem plays with spacing, line breaks, rhyme, and meter to assist the flow of the message.

Immediately, the first line of the poem has a double meaning. “In Just-” can be taken to mean that it's just barely Spring, as well as it can be referring to the word: injustice. From the very first encounter with the poem, the title, the reader can expect that perhaps some sort of injutice is occuring within the poem. The spacing between the words helps the reader to visualize the words. For example, leaving extra space between “whistles far and wee” (line 5) makes the reader see the whistle carrying on far and long. Cummings plays with words, also, by combining them. “Mud-luscious” is put to great use because it combines the words and accentuates the meaning of the word; the mud is luscious and rich and full; Visually, the fullness of the word “luscious” expands into the word “mud.” He also used word play with the children's names. “eddieandbill” (line 6) and later, “bettyandisbel” (line 14). Combining the children's names adds the meaning that the children are interchangeable. Every year it's a new set of kids playing but the old balloonman is always there, watching them and stuck working. Cumming's is taking away the uniqueness of the children and lumping them together into one; by combining the names he makes the point that it's not eddie and bill, nor betty and isbel exactly individually but it's any kid he sees playing. The combining of the names could also signify that the kids are best friends and the balloonman sees them as one because they're always together.

The poem works well in Knock at a Star for the uniqueness of its word play and meaning. For a young reader, it can send the message about injustice. It might be a bit more challenging, as well, for a younger audience but it would work as a wonderful canvas or starting point for discussion. The authors couldn't have selected a better poem to demonstrate the best use of word play in a poem. Cummings effectively deals with the topic of injustice towards others. The balloonman is described as lame, queer, old, and goat-footed. These adjectives are how the children view the balloonman. The conversation may be about why they describe the balloonman as they do. What makes the balloonman queer and lame? The poem lends to the idea that the children view him as such because they don't understand or relate to him. While “eddieandbill come running from marbles and piracies” (5-6) and while “bettyandisbel come dancing from hop-scotch and jump-rope” (13-14) the balloonman “whistles far and we.” (20-24). The children never interact with the balloonman and to them, he's just this older man whistling and not enjoying the fresh spring weather, as they are. At the end, Cummings capitalizes the M in balloonMan. Cummings may be suggesting that the balloonman is demanding recognition, here. He is not just a goat-footed balloonman, he is a man. He is a person. Children need to understand that he is a person too and they shouldn't judge him because they don't understand him. If taught properly and broken down for a younger audience, this poem can teach profound lessons of acceptance and understanding. As is the case with many poems in Knock at a Star, In Just- could work just as well if placed in the Sends Messages section as it does in the Word Play section.

Under the Sends Messages section is the poem “Poor” by Myra Cohn Livingston. The poem contains three stanzas and internal slant rhyme. Internal rhyme is when “a word within a line rhymes with another word in that line or rhymes with a word of similar placement in the following line” (Knorr, Schell 42) and slant rhyme is when “the sounds nearly rhyme but do not form a 'true rhyme.'” “Poor” combines both rhyming techniques. For example, “I heard of poor. It means hungry, no food, no shoes” (25). The words “food” and “shoes” offer the same “ooh” sound. The author also repeats the double-o three times in the first stanza with “poor,” “food,” and “good.” This is a good demontration of assonance which is when “the same vowel sound is heard repeatedly within a line or a few lines of poetry” (Essentials of Children's Literature 59). In the second stanza, Livingston uses slant end rhyme. The words “cold,” “alone,” and “old” offer the same “oh” sound. According to The Essentials of Children's Literature, “Parts of words may be repeated, as with rhyme, the sound device that children most recognize and enjoy” (59). Livingston poem offers interesting sound devices that may make it easy and fun for the reader. Because Knock at a Star is a poetry book intended for a younger audience, sound devices could have been important for the authors to keep in mind when selecting the poems. 

 

The fact they placed “Poor” in the Send Messages section is arguably a mistake, though.

Written in the description of the Send Messagessection, it reads: “Poems often have a point to make” (22). What is the message of “Poor”? According to Livingston, poor is “being cold. It is lonely, alone, feeling old” (lines 6-8). Poor sounds like the worst possible thing. While it's true being poor can be hard, people get through it and some even rise above it. This is not the right message to send to a child. The message can come off as anti-inspirational and discouraging. It is important, as well, to point out that Livingston may not have intended her poem to be read this way. According to website Project Muse, “When Myra Cohn Livingston speaks, all those concerned with quality in literature for the young, especially in poetry, should listen.” Perhaps she wrote the poem in the eyes of a child who doesn't understand the many aspects of being poor. If the poem is meant to be read as from the eyes of a child, it would be essential to make sure the child reading it understands that this is not necessarily what being poor is. “Poetry is the most misused genre in classrooms, often used for memorization and handwriting practice. . . [the unit] bombards students with abstract poems that they are expected to analyze in order to uncover the 'hidden meanings'” (Essentials of Children's Literature 69). The fact is, many families struggle with money and it's often hard to know how much a child catches on to financial woes; if taught in a classroom, this poem would require additional conversation and an advantage of it may be to work as a bridge of communication with children about poverty. This poem may not be as relevant, or appropriate, in 2012 as maybe it was in 1999 when Knock at a Star was published. If read in a classroom, a child reader may feel self-conscious or singled out. The poem might be better placed in the Share Feelings section which contains poetry that “can express many different moods: happiness, sadness, anger, fear, loneliness” (28). If the narrator of the poem is meant to be a child, it should be in the Share Feelings section because, then, the point of the poem is for the child to share their feelings about the word poor and communicate what they think it means to be poor. In the case of “Poor” the feelings being expressed could be anger, fear, sadness, and lonliness. In the case of this poem, who the speaker is becomes essential to it's appropriateness. 

 

“Narcissa” by Gwendolyn Brooks (42) may have been a better fit than “Poor” for the Send Messages section as it offers many inspirational and encouraging messages, depending on how it is read. It also works perfectly well is the Help You Understand People category in which it was placed. “Narcissa” can be interpreted as a poem about imagination. While all the other girls are playing games, Narcissa sits against the brick wall, looking at tiger-lilies (line 7) and imagining herself as a queen (line 9). The poem, too, can imply that Narcissa is a narcisist and that may, indeed, be the way the other girls in the poem view Narcissa because she sits alone. The 3^rd person point of the view of the poem offers an outsiders take on the scene which leaves room for interpretation. This section of Knock at a Star offers insight that many children may not get in their day to day experiences. At younger ages, it's often hard to think outside of onself and try to understand the how's and why's of others; it's hard to put onself in another's shoes. “Poems, too, can give us insight into why people act as they do. Even a small poem, by showing us in words what a person looks like or what he or she is thinking can help us understand more about our families, our friends, and the other people on our planet” (40).

“Narcissa” uses a fun, upbeat rhythm and rhyme scheme. If read in the context that Narcissa isn't liked by the other girls because she's viewed as narcisistic, then the fun upbeat pattern of rhyme can counteract the negative connotations towards Narcissa and teach a young reader acceptance. For example, the second stanza reads: “Small Narcissa sits upon A brick in her back yard And looks at tiger-lilies, and shakes her pig tales hard.” The rhythm in this poem is essential to interpreting it's meaning. The rising meter, which is when “we go from unstressed syllables to stressed syllables,” (Knorr, Schell 46) makes the poem feel uplifting. The rhythm of the words can change the meaning from being, in this case, negative to positive. Just because Narcissa is sitting alone and not playing with the other girls, doesn't mean she's not enjoying herself or that she is antisocial. To help a child understand people, this may come in handy. Putting something hard to understand in simple, optimistic packaging can make all the difference. It can be the difference between singling Narcissa out and bullying her, or accepting her and possibly befriending her.

Also in the Help You Understand People section is the poem “Two People” by Eve Merriam. The poem is about family members and how sometimes they have opposite personalities but they still love each other. “In just about everything they disagree, but they love one another and they both love me” (lines 13-16). “Two People” sends a great lesson to children to help them accept others unlike themselves. It's relateable for children to remember they're parents love them. The rhyme scheme is fun and simple for a child to understand and the message, summed up in the last stanza, is clear. Merriam “began writing her own poems when she was seven or eight years old” (PoetryFoundation.org). Merriam seems to have taken to writing for children for much of her career.

“Poems about nature, animals, family, and the everyday experiences children encounter never disappeared from her children's books, yet she stretched beyond these traditional sensibilities of childhood and shifted her concerns to reflect the inner emotional conflicts and stark realities of the world facing children: anxieties, alienation, racial and social injustice, war, inhumane technology, and the struggles of urban life" (PoetryFoundation.org).

“Two People” is a creative, and clear approach to breaching the topic of loving and accepting ones family members. The poem can assist with sibling rivalvy, as well, if two siblings are opposite and feel like they have nothing in common. The rhyming of the poem also makes it easier to show to children as it can start a discussion about loving your family no matter what, on a lighter note. “Numerous critics have been impressed with Merriam's poetry for young readers. They applaud her serious attempt to get children involved in poetry by providing poems that are pleasurable, approachable, and stimulating to both the intellect and the senses.” (poetryfoundation.org). The speaker of “Two People” is the child of two parents who are opposite which makes it easy for other young readers to relate to.

The rhyme scheme is ABCB, DEDE, FGHG, IJKJ. “...One of Merriam's chief aims as a writer of children's poetry was to instill in youth the same fascination with language that she experienced . . . She maintains that no one learns to love poetry without hearing it read out loud” poetryfoundation.org). As is deomnstrated with “Two People,” poetry can act best when read aloud to children. Again, as seen in the other poems, the rhyme scheme makes the poem fun to read and enjoyable while communicating a strong, simple message. The format of the poem plays with opposites which helps the reader connect the dots; “He gulps down cold drinks, she sips at hot” (9-10). Instead of drawing attention to how opposite the two people are Merriam takes the two opposite traits, combines them in a sort of couplet within each stanza and makes them work as a pair. Children can look at the child speaker of the poem and identify the level of love and accepance displayed; as was the case with “Narcissa” this, ideally, can act as a deterrent to bullying. The poem is entirely relevant in 2012 as when the book was published. Many children come from unique family structures and “Two People” can help them understand that even though their family may not resemble someone else's, if they have love on their side then it doesn't matter what it looks like to anyone else. Whether it's because their parents are divorced, separated, foster parents, adoptive parents, same sex parents, or birth parents, this poem can help them understand that the only important this to concern themselves with is if they are loved. “Two People” reaches beyond “traditional sensibilities” and can assist in ensuring a child does not feel alienated, unloved, or alone. 

 

Knock at a Star offers many, many more unique and creative poems than the ones mentioned. This compilation is a great beginning to creating a lifelong love for poetry. It is clearly seen that the use of 'tone' is a poem can make all the difference; it can change a subject with negative connotations to being one with an uplifting message as was seen with “Poor”, “Narcissa”, and “Two People.” The speaker of the poem is also extremely important as it creates a credible source for the reader. Young readers will most likely identify stronger with a young speaker, as opposed to an adult who may come off as preachy in which case, “Poor,” “Two People,” and “Canis Major” may end up being a child's favorite out the selected poems. The child may identify with the underdog and the young speakers as opposed to the 3^rd person speaker in “Narcissa” and “In Just-”. Each poem in Knock at a Star has appropriate language – meaning, a younger audience could easily understand the vocabulary. E. E. Cumming's “In Just-” may at first seem confusing, but because children are still learning vocabulary, his creative fabricated words – such as mud-luscious – might make total sense to them. Knock at a Star reaches high in the sky with the hopes of creating a love for poetry in children that may otherwise never occur.

©November 2012

Works Cited

"E. E. Cummings." : The Poetry Foundation. N.p., n.d. Web. 2 Nov. 2012. <http://www.poetryfoundation.org/bio/e-e-cummings>.

"Eve Merriam." : The Poetry Foundation. N.p., n.d. Web. 2 Nov. 2012. <http://www.poetryfoundation.org/bio/eve-merriam>.

"Gwendolyn Brooks." : The Poetry Foundation. N.p., n.d. Web. 2 Nov. 2012. <http://www.poetryfoundation.org/bio/gwendolyn-brooks>.

Helbig, Alethea K. "Project MUSE - Myra Cohn Livingston Offers a "New Mythology" in The Child as Poet." Project MUSE - Myra Cohn Livingston Offers a "New Mythology" in The Child as Poet. N.p., n.d. Web. 14 Nov. 2012. helbig.html>.

Kennedy, X. J., Dorothy M. Kennedy, and Karen Baker. Knock at a Star: A Child's Introduction to Poetry. Boston: Little, Brown, 1999. Print.

Knorr, Jeff, and Tim Schell. Mooring against the Tide: Writing Fiction and Poetry. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall, 2006. Print.

Lynch-Brown, Carol, Carl M. Tomlinson, and Kathy G. Short. Essentials of Children's Literature. 7th ed. Boston, MA: Pearson, 2011. Print.

"Robert Frost." : The Poetry Foundation. N.p., n.d. Web. 2 Nov. 2012. <http://www.poetryfoundation.org/bio/robert-frost>.

Aravind Adiga's Between the Assassinations

Living in Class

Aravind Adiga's Between the Assasination's is a compilation of short stories taking place in Kittur, South Africa. Kittur is a fake town located "between Goa and Calicut" (1). The stories within the novel occur between the 1980's and 1990's; they hone in on the years following Indira Gandhi's assasination in 1984. The stories in Between the Assasination's are about the societal struggles and corruption brought on by, or coinciding with, the caste system. Each story paints a rather morose, bleak picture of of India in these years. Some stories follow a main character who temporarily triumphs the caste-system but falls back down in the end, while most other stories follow character's who remain pinned by the caste-system, either economically or socially. The novel reveals that the caste system spurred corruption and only separated society by creating a hierachy that ended up pinning people, even those from higher castes, into corners that were impossible to navigate out of. 

 

In Valencia: To the First Crossroads, Adiga portrays a Brahmin woman who is treated lesser than the lowest of castes. The story follows Jayamma, a Brahmin woman by birth, whose family had nine children and could only afford to marry off the first six of them; Jayamma was one of the unlucky children they couldn't afford. Most of the story follows Jayamma staying with the Panchinalli family as one of two servants; the other servant is a Hoyka named Shaila. Jayamma and Shaila do not get along at first because they think less of one another due to their caste-mindsets. "It's not me making the noise, master – it's that Hoyka girl! She doesn't know our Brahmin ways" (227). The advocate, Mr. Panchinalli, tells Jayamma, "She may be a hoyka...but she is clean, and works well" (227). Mr. Panchinalli seems to be outside of the caste-mindset. He treats Jayamma and Shails as equals. But interestingly, Adiga had the Hoyka, Shaila, get married off. Jayamma has no economic freedom and the caste system is pinning her down so she's stuck; she cannot be married nor have sex nor do as she pleases. There's no way for her to move around because all her earnings are sent back to her family who refuse to let her stay with them, and are constantly sending her off to other households to continue working. Shaila is a lower caste and she is far happier than Jayamma. Jayamma is a higher caste but she didn't reap the benefits of being it. The caste system seems to have failed here. The Christian neighbor girl, Rosie, is a minority and probably considered even lower than everyone else yet she is happy. At the end, "a strange thought came to her: maybe, if she sinned enough in this life, she would be sent back as a Christian in the next one" (242). She could be carefree and do as she pleases; she'd be free of the caste system. Jayamma is an example of someone who has no means to wriggle out of the constraints of the caste-system. 

 

In Market and Maidan, Adiga follows Keshava and his brother, Vittal, whose parents are no longer taking care of them and they team up to face society together. They're not actually brothers,"The two of them had been brothers for only a few days" (111). They are in the same boat and this bonds them together as much as any blood ties would. They go to the market place in search of a relative, an uncle, they heard lived there. When they arrive they are told "no Hoykas [live] in this market (112). It's as if they are implying the village is too good to have any Hoykas in it. Their uncle is a shoemaker in the village who initially puts both Keshava and Vittal to work but later he realizes he doesn't have enough work for both boys and he sends Keshava to work with the barber. Meanwhile, the boys are living in an alleyway and get visited by the town "brother" who comes around randomly to collect money for their sleeping arrangements. This portrayal of life in India shows how lowly those in lower castes have to live; they have to pay to sleep on the street. When they couldn't pay, Brother went to hit Vittal but Keshava stopped him and Brother appreciated his bravery by offering him work on the bus. Keshava already had an interest in the buses and jumped at the oppurtunity, which Vittal and the barber did not like. The way Keshava jumped at the opportunity is interesting because it shows the depseration of individuals seeking to better their lives. He was ready to pounce and leave his support group behind, portraying an 'every man for himself' mentality. Keshava excelled and got promoted when another bus driver was injured. For awhile Keshava does well as the bus driver but he still isn't happy and by the end he gets injured and kicked out of his hostel. When he tries to turn to Brother for help, Brother and those in the hostel turn their back on him and say, "This Hoyka is mad! And he stinks! Get him out of here" (141). Then the bus driver, who was injured before Keshava took his job, arrived and offered Keshava food which he rejected because it stank. In this story, the lower caste was able to rise up momentarily but in the end he is just as stuck as anyone within the caste system. His happiness was never met, even as he excelled, perhaps because he knew that eventually he would drop right back down to his Hoyka-level.

In the first three stories of the book, Adiga shows plainly how hard it is for someone of a lower caste to rise up. In The Railway Station, The Bunder, and Lighthouse Hill, the character's are naive and vulnerable to being taken advantage of. Corruption found them all but each one overcomes the obstacle, in a way, at the end of each story yet remains pinned down by their place in society. In The Railway Station, Zaiuddin, who is a Muslim, bounces from job to job and is always accused of theft. He stumbles upon a job getting paid to watch trains but realizes later that he doesn't know why he's collecting the information and decides he can't be a part of it. 

In The Bunder, Abassi is the manager of a factory in Bunder which "has the highest crime rate in Kittur, and is the scene of frequent stabbings, police raids, and arrests" (23). He discovers his employees are going blind because the stitching they're required to do is too detailed. While sitting with a group of thugs one night, Abassi says: "Corruption. It's like a demon sitting on my brain and eating it with a fork and knife" (31). They discuss how they're all being gipped and conned, and he starts to wonder if there's nothing anyone can do to fight back. He feels guilt about the women in the factory going blind and sends them home, with full pay, at the end. 

In Lighthouse Hill, Xerox wants everyone to have the freedom to read this book that is banned. Xerox, like the banned book, is shunned from society because he is the son of an untouchable. At the end of the story, even after being beaten up in prison by a lawyer and policeman, he goes back to the station to warn them he is going to sell the book and at the end he treks up a hill to try sell it. He tells the policeman, "You can break my legs, but I can't stop selling books. I'm destined to do this" (47). Xerox figures whatever the country is trying to hide by banning the book should be revealed to everyone; as the officials beat him he was awakened to the reality of corruption and he hopes others can read this banned book and be awakened to the corruption, as well. 

In each of Aravind Adiga's stories, corruption and economical struggles run rampant in the lives of those in lower castes. All are unable to move from their appointed place in life. The caste system in the novel is viewed as counter-productive and detrimental to many. If anyone is ever able to shift their roles, albeit momentarily, they remain unhappy and discontent; they know inevitably something will happen to push them back into their roles. Adiga's sonorous depiction of the caste-system is accurate and quite telling of how life changed between the assassinations. 

 ©October 2012

Sefi Atta's Everything Good Will Come

Empowerment Will Come

Sefi Atta's novel, Everything Good Will Come, is an unabashing, raw story that explores life in Africa after the Biafran War through the eyes and ears of the main character, Enitan. Enitan dreams of being viewed as equal in society. She comes across many types of women and with each one, she tries to further her cause for female empowerment. Atta weaves seamlessly through the relationships Enitan has throughout her life to portray a subtle, gradual shift that results in a whole new outlook by the end. Each relationship changes or affects her and contributes to the enthusiastic, dancing Enitan seen at at the end of the novel when her father is released from prison. Everything Good Will Come, portrays men as one-sided and women as push-overs through their roles in society but subtly, Atta shows the degrees of independence and strength by bouncing each character's differences off one another to reveal that everybody's role is only what they make of it. It seems to be sending the message that the fight at large is not about sex roles in society but rather a fight for human empowerment. 

The relationship between Enitan and her best friend, Sheri, is an interesting and revealing aspect to the novel. As children, Sheri and Enitan were opposites. They came from different backgrounds and different family structures. "Sheri was a Moslem and she didn't know much about Christianity, except that there was a book in the Bible and if you read it, you'd go mad" (34). Their friendship begins early in the novel and continues until the very end, but, like any relationship, it has its ups and downs. After Sheri gets raped, Enitan feels less than sympathetic for her best friend. Enitan actually feels that it's Sheri's fault. As the rape occured, it was as if Enitan didn't understand what was happening. She felt that it was "a silent moment; a peaceful moment. A funny moment, too," (62). At this part of the novel, Enitan was still too naive and immature to understand what had happened to her friend and, possibly, the thought of sex still embarrassed her, which is why she wasn't sure if she should laugh and be comfortable with it or be silent and horrified. Later, Sheri settles down with a married man, and Enitan is less than enthused for her friend's decision. In a perhaps true, but brutally cynical moment, Enitan reflects that, "Marriage could immediately wipe out a sluttish past"(102). Upon further reflection, Enitan feels: "Sheri was the Nigerian man's ideal: pretty shapely, yellow to boot, with some regard for a woman's station. Now she was a kitchen martyr, and may well have forgotten how to flaunt her mind," (105). Enitan is looking down on her friend, yet again. She feels that she is better than her because she is living a seemingly blameless, more worthy lifestyle. She sees a woman in the kitchen and immediately assumes they are succumbing to their role in society. Later in the novel, she goes as far as "likening a handful of kitchen martyrs to people confined in Nigerian prisons," (326).

Enitan's mother and father have very different approaches to raising her. When they find a book in Enitan's suitcase, they have diametrical points of view. The mother demands that Enitan never see Sheri again because she's a bad influence and the father feels that the mother is over-reacting. Her father says, "You're her mother, not her juror" (37). During Enitan's childhood, her parents were constantly bickering, and Sheri was an escape for her. Sheri offered something new and "led [her] to the gap between parental consent and disapproval" (43). Mid-novel, Enitan basically turns her back on her mother and follows entirely in her father's footsteps. "I no long believed her; hurt one moment, hurtful the next. She could recall what my father said ten years ago, and yet she misconstrued my entire childhood" (93). This is a turning point in the novel for Enitan, who was raised by her mother's strict rules and is now deciding for herself she disagrees. In a way, Enitan is not only turning her back on her mother's ways but, also, she's acknowleding a denial of her female role in society. Now that Enitan is well educated and has seen the world through her own eyes, she can turn her back on her mother's beliefs. It shows a generational change. Her mother is still stuck, perhaps, in the old view of women's roles, while Enitan is trying to find her own place in society. She doesn't want her mothers perception of men and woman to affect her outlook. Her mother is so focused on her husband and how he treated her that she was blind to see how it affected Enitan. All the mother could see was her role as a wife. She couldn't see herself as a mother, as a friend, or as a mentor, and it affected how Enitan's childhood is conveyed. But what's interesting is that Enitan in a way ends up very much like her mother for awhile. She marries Niyi and argues with him. And just as the father's mother came at Enitan's mother, "threatening that he would take another wife" (173), Niyi's mother confronts Enitan to remind her "He is the head of the house" (301).

Enitan's relationship with Niyi is revealing and essential to portray the societal expectations of men and women. "Niyi Franco. He was a lawyer, though he was now a manager in an insurance company. His grandfather was a lawyer. His father and four brothers were lawyers. His mother retired from nursing the year he was born" (163). Niyi and his family represent the socially ideal roles. All the men in the family are lawyers, and the women stay at home and attend to the house and family needs. When Enitan wants to get involved in the protests for her father's sake, Niyi has an attitude towards the movement that Enitan is so deeply passionate about. He's not willing to support it or speak out for it, and instead, he only looks out for himself. He doesn't realize how vulnerable he might be if he didn't have the cushion of money in his family line. Contrastingly, Mother-of-Prison is only looking out for her family's best interests. She killed a man because she was assaulted after her husband died but even in prison she speaks out against societal wrongs. She won't be quiet. 

Enitan's first boyfriend, Mike, was quite a different portrayal. Mike was an artist and though his career wasn't enticing, Enitan still dated him. "Mike was wrong. Most women I knew would sprint from an artist. It meant that they might have to dabble with poverty and poverty always cleared people's eyes in Lagos" (83). Enitan was never seeking a career-driven, put-together kind of man. She wanted someone to share her passions with, and after Mike cheated on her, Niyi was just the right fit. But Enitan was never fullfilled with Niyi, she "never once expected him to tell [her she] was beautiful," (214) which is why she decided to leave him by the end of the novel. Niyi was holding Enitan back from what truly mattered to her, and she wasn't the kind of woman he wanted. He told her, "You are not a domesticated woman. You just don't have that...that loving quality," (214). Atta seems to be implying that gender roles are one thing, but what men are to women and how that affects their individual lives is another thing. Enitan wasn't what Niyi wanted because she didn't fit the mold. 

Yet, Atta still shows how societal expectations affected Enitan. "In my 29 years no man every told me to show respect. No man ever needed to. I had seen how women respected men. . .Too many woman, I thought, ended up treating domestic frustrations like mild cases of indegestion: shift-shift, prod-prod and then nothing" (186). Enitan never had to be told. She learned through watching other woman. It reinforces that idea that society has been like this a long time. Men come before women, and women know it. Woman are expected to cook, clean, and play house.Yet it doesn't have to be said, so it's not reinforced, perse, to each generation verbally, which contributes to why Enitan is able to question it. Shortly after Enitan's reflections and realization that society seeped into her head somehow, she goes through a mental battle. She breaks women into the three categories: "strong and silent, chatterbox but cheerful, weak and kindhearted. All the rest were known as horrible women," (200). Enitan isn't content fitting into these groupings. She wants to "tear every notion they had about women," and create a new perception that she could happily fit into. 

 

It took a long time for Enitan to come to the understanding that even though some women are not fighting the sexism as she so blatantly is, it doesn't mean they are not fighting at all. "So cynical was I about the core of strength an African woman was meant to possess, untouchable, impenetrable, because I didn't possess one myself." (252). Enitan realizes that she's been wrong in her view of African women. She once thought they were weak and easily influenced, but now she can see the silent strength. African women take on a lot more than they appear to. Most of the things they do go unnoticed and are internal. Meaning, the things they contribute are expected, but the battle and the way they fight is by sacrificing something of themselves for the better of their families. Mother-of-Prisons is the prime example of this. Her husband couldn't hold a job and she paid for everything in their home and then told people "that it was [her] husband who was providing" (277). And her husband ran with it. She didn't marry him for love, she married him because it's what women do. Sheri did the same thing. Enitan sees Mother-of-Prisons as a role model because she won't stop using her voice. Even though it won't change anything, it still means something to her. Similarly, the reporter Grace Ameh, who was imprisoned with Enitan, acknowledges that they are just "fighting for a chance to be heard" (298). The only other strong role model Atta gave of an independent, strong women working all on her own was Sheri's grandmother, Alhaja whom the reader barely got introduced. "Alhaja headed a market women's union and earned enough to educate her children overseas" (158). Sheri took after her grandmother because she started her own catering business to give herself more freedom. But the bottom line is that everybody's role is what they make of it. Married or single, working or not, vocal or silent – each woman gets to make their own impact, and it all still matters in the end.

While Grace Ameh decided to be a reporter to speak out, Mother-of-Prisons chose to fight silently. Sheri and her grandmother Alhaja chose to start their own businesses as their way of combating the societal expectations that women remain in the home. Niyi's mother and Enitan's mother remained in the societal roles. Mike used female goddesses in his art as if to make his case against society, but morally, his actions cancelled out his opportunity to make a strong statement in the novel. Niyi was supportive of Enitan as a typical husband would be but he didn't support her passions at all because he wasn't personally affected by it. This was "a country struggling with foreign family structures" (247). Everyone is trying to fit the mold, but the mold might not be right for the place and time. Enitan rejected her role and chose to take her own path when she left her husband. Her enthusiastic dancing at the end, when her father is released, is the cherry-on-top of Atta's point. It is a fight for human rights as a whole. While women in particular still have to go to great lengths to be equal with men, the overall battle is for human empowerment and the release of her father is one small step in the right direction.

© October 2012

Works Cited

  Atta, Sefi. Everything Good Will Come: A Novel. Northampton, MA: Interlink, 2005. Print.