Douglass’ Corner: Christian Slave holders

In Chapter X, Douglass has many mixed emotions and feelings. At some points he speaks of the unjustifiable actions from the christian slaveholders while at others he is still profoundly proud in his christian faith. When given the ‘root of protection’ by a fellow slave Douglass ponders the works of it and its ability to help. Even after all of his hardships Douglass stays fairly strong in his faith. I find this very interesting, especially when the bible itself tells of accepting slavery on multiple occasions. Another point that Douglass brings up that was most likely seen as controversial for the time was his lack of trust and support of the Underground Railroad. Douglass gives the makers credit for what they are trying to do but adds that “they do nothing towards enlightening the slave, whilst they do much towards enlightening the master” (1054). Although in the next chapter, I feel like it is an important viewpoint to bring up. 

Douglass is very strong in his christian faith; he looks to god for guidance and assurance. Although faulty at some points, Douglass does give off the sense that overall he sticks with his faith. On the other hand, some argue that the root that Douglass was given shifted his faith slightly to include more pagan ideals. As seen in the chapter, after the root was given to Douglass, he dealt with no more whippings, only physical fights to stand up for himself. I think that Douglass still considered himself a christian, just with some added superstition. I would consider the turning point of morality in the chapter when Douglass and Covey get into their last and major physical altercation. After this, Douglass got the courage to stand up for himself more and attempt escape many times from various places. He also deals with those who look down upon and mistreat him in a less standoff way, he physically and mentally defends himself.

Nina Baym- is Her Stance Valid?

I would use “The Birth-Mark” to support Nina Baym’s position on Hawthorne’s writing. Similarly to in The Scarlet Letter, the woman, Georgiana, in “The Birth-Mark” is suppressed emotionally and physically by the male figures (specifically her husband) while others in society view her as either beautiful or scary. Georgiana has a birthmark in the shape of a hand on her cheek, the subject of her husbands disgrace towards her. Baym uses an in depth understanding on feminism to portray Hawthorne’s unique way of what some would consider ‘hidden’ feminist ideals in his writing. While on the surface his writing might seem misogynistic and sexist, there is a deeper meaning.

While “The Book-Mark” can be used to support Baym’s argument, those who disagree with her can also argue that Hawthorne’s writing is extremely sexist. Going back to how Georgiana’s husband treats her, it is apparent that he has no significant respect for her. Also, in the end of the short story, Georgiana dies after her husband’s final attempt to remove the mark from her face. Overall the aspect of Georgiana’s birthmark being her defining ‘horrific’ feature to her husband and her never being good enough with it can be viewed as sexist and downgrading. 

Overall, Hawthorne’s “The Book-Mark” does support Baym’s stance on Hawthorne’s feminism in his writing. Although both sides of the argument can be supported with textual evidence, I think the feminist underlying themes are aparent. Hawthorne was a progressive writer for his time and I believe his writings portray his more liberal ideals. Although the idea that some of Hawthorne’s writings are generally accepted by some, the themes Hawthorne expresses in his writings can be dissected to reveal feminist and liberal viewpoints. 

The “Transparent Eyeball” Post #1

In the beginning of chapter one, Emerson comments on how the level of solitude an author experiences can alter his writings. He mentions that if alone, you should “look at the stars” and that will give them separation from the real world (Emerson 554). As he continues, he states and defends the point that adults cannot see nature other than in a poetical sense. In the passage about the “transparent eyeball,” Emerson is detailing how he experiences nature. I find that Emerson calls himself a “particle of God” very interesting (Emerson 556). In this time period the christian belief that God created all was highly believed, although we know from past readings that Emerson was trying to get away from the religious aspect of the world. I find it intriguing that he still mentions God in this chapter.

 I think Emerson is trying to describe the feeling when you are so involved in your surroundings that your thoughts are altered and you can not think of anything else than how nature is represented. Personally, I feel this when I am working. As a vet assistant I have to be extremely focused on the task at hand and not be distracted by anything around me. Although it is not related to nature, I believe that the feeling Emerson describes does not only relate to nature. 

The last thing I want to mention is Emerson’s last sentence in the paragraph, specifically when he says “In the tranquil landscape…man beholds somewhat as beautiful as his own nature” (556). I believe Emerson is relating this passage to what he says in the beginning of the chapter when he mentions natural objects and the impression they make on an open mind. As humans we are natural objects, and Emerson expresses this and how nature is what we need to strive to obtain during the chapter.

---

Follow My Blog

Get new content delivered directly to your inbox.