CL201, April 3rd, 2008
Spring is late and Easter came early, now lingering in the current theme of our colloquium. Prof. Abraham made announcements about the impending climax of the semester for us. In preparation, we are to read the introduction to "Creationists" and its first essay, "Genesis", and Professor Porter will be speaking on Religion in Literature today.
Purely by chance the stage had been set up for a play, presumably for an unrelated performance scheduled for later. On one side was a scene of a green garden, evoking Eden in the context of the current topic, and on the other side was a scene bathed in a fiery light, of a path leading out of a glade, fitting in with the theme of expulsion from paradise into a hellish world. Complementing the picture a headstone inscribed "R.I.P. Mom" stood in front of the garden scene, and a well-head sat toward center stage. Without reaching too far we can assign meanings: The well is symbolic of deep thought, imagination and contemplation. Its water sustains the tree whose fruit is the knowledge of good and evil. The tombstone might signify the passage of Matriarchal society with the rise of a Patriarchal Judeo-Christian tradition.
Prof. Porter prepared us for E.L.D.'s announced theme of Religion in Literature but was careful not to anticipate the particular subject of next week's lecture too closely. Instead we were given a look at the particular problem of Evil in religion, focusing on evil in Nature, stopping short of Man's inhumanity to Man. Why should we suffer from natural causes like storms, earthquakes, diseases and old age, if there is an all-powerful, all-loving God?. It is a sticking point in the medieval writings on the proofs of existence of God, by writers such as Anselm, Aquinas and Augustine. We were then presented with the distilled essences of a number of classic works, occupying distinct positions in a grand debate.
Thus Milton's "Paradise Lost" justifies the ways of God to Man and the world is hellish to be a just punishment for Man's transgressions. From Leibnitz, Shaftsbury and Pope we pluck, "Good and Evil in perfect proportions", "All nature is but Art", and, "Whatever is, is right". Prof Porter followed up his descriptions with the appropriate questions of principles of justice and logical consistency raised by the conservative orthodox opinion.
In contrast, the modern examples confront the contradictions and seek meaning within the ambiguities as it applies to our current existence. The story of Job is thematic in Archibald Macleish's play, "J.B.", where the contemporary protagonist struggles with his sufferings and feelings about enjoying the bounty of life. Eventually the play rejects the idea of Evil being due punishment. Instead, the debate between characters representing archetypes of God and Satan sees suffering as a way to realization. This viewpoint also raises troubling questions on the nature of faith and logical consistency.
Voltaire's "Candide" is a secular humanist confrontation of the conservative orthodoxy. Candide, the son of a nobleman, is kicked out of the castle by his father for kissing one of the maids, a parallel to the story of Adam and Eve. Candide then undergoes various experiences with war and suffering, and he questions the given faith in discussions with the character Pangloss, his tutor who takes the orthodox line, "All is for the best". Candide's eventual rejection of Pangloss is suggested by the caricature contained in the name of Pangloss: "Pan" means "all" and "gloss" means "to shine up", so it implies that the orthodoxy is apologist. Candide's conclusion is a retreat to a dissociation from discourse, limiting oneself to ones own world.
Voltaire is a pen name, adopted because the Church defended its orthodoxy by persecuting any challenge to it, and Voltaire also took care to cover his trail by publishing from countries other than his native France. Even so, he had to be circumspect, and I think Candide's conclusion understates Voltaire's true opinion, whatever it may have been. Surely we can be bolder, free to choose between Believer, Doubter, Agnostic and Atheist.
Someone said that God did not create Man, it was the other way around! Reading the intro to "Creationists" we find the suggestion supported: Writing is creation and Writers are engaged with, as well as being estranged from, their texts beyond the material construction of "revelatory structures of fact". I just need to quibble with the last sentence of the intro, "All creationists are mortal": Not as long as there is a Reader, an aspect that is not touched on in the intro, but does abut the language issue that begins the essay "Genesis".
From the chapter on Genesis, God's words begin in the stories told by humans about the human condition, emerging from barbarism into an articulated civilization. Writers continue that tradition, and the character of God that develops in the scriptures is so much like Man it seems persuasive that they are, all three now, Writer, God and Man, one and the same, just as the Creationist is indistinguishable from the Creation and its Re-creation, the writer from the text and the reading of it.
Sunday, April 6, 2008
Friday, March 28, 2008
Prof. Klingensmith , The Book of Daniel & "Daniel"
CL201, Mar27, 2008
Prof. Klingensmith continues the pattern of comparing the book with the film, as was done with Billy Bathgate and Ragtime. With "Daniel" the author himself wrote the screenplay, which is unusual, and gives a special authenticity to the movie's representation of the novel. Prof. Klingensmith pointed out that the book is underpinned by the main character's writing of it, but that aspect is written out of the screenplay by E.L.D., the point being that the novel is a subjective revelation of the narrator, which is accomplished directly on film and we see Daniel changing as the story unfolds.
Skipping over the controversies among the critics over the book vs. film discussions, Prof. Klingensmith led us instead to some practical suggestions about what to look for as we watch the movie. Using short clips we were told to notice the choice of color and "framing" as the movie switches between the two time periods of the story. Home life in the early past is shown in golden brown tones, framed by doors, windows and hallways to create a portraiture of Daniel's childhood memories. There is an overall impression of warm, loving family relationships, full of enthusiastic people with enlightened views and progressive visions and aspirations. As the past progresses to its tragic conclusion the tones change to grays and sepia that reflect the despair and horror of the unfolding tragedy.
The present, in contrast, begins in tones of cold blue and gray, carrying over the despair at the end of the "golden" age as the main characters struggle with coming to terms with the past. At the very end of the movie the colors are clarified to natural tones in sunny scenes and soaring camera work that seek to convey a positive closure amidst an ambiguous conclusion.
After the class I volunteered to return the film to the library and went and watched the movie first. I was grateful for the instruction because it helped to get through the emotionally draining movie, just as the book was emotionally draining to read. Daniel's survival in the end is about telling the story. To be able to go on he must tell the tale.
Prof. Klingensmith continues the pattern of comparing the book with the film, as was done with Billy Bathgate and Ragtime. With "Daniel" the author himself wrote the screenplay, which is unusual, and gives a special authenticity to the movie's representation of the novel. Prof. Klingensmith pointed out that the book is underpinned by the main character's writing of it, but that aspect is written out of the screenplay by E.L.D., the point being that the novel is a subjective revelation of the narrator, which is accomplished directly on film and we see Daniel changing as the story unfolds.
Skipping over the controversies among the critics over the book vs. film discussions, Prof. Klingensmith led us instead to some practical suggestions about what to look for as we watch the movie. Using short clips we were told to notice the choice of color and "framing" as the movie switches between the two time periods of the story. Home life in the early past is shown in golden brown tones, framed by doors, windows and hallways to create a portraiture of Daniel's childhood memories. There is an overall impression of warm, loving family relationships, full of enthusiastic people with enlightened views and progressive visions and aspirations. As the past progresses to its tragic conclusion the tones change to grays and sepia that reflect the despair and horror of the unfolding tragedy.
The present, in contrast, begins in tones of cold blue and gray, carrying over the despair at the end of the "golden" age as the main characters struggle with coming to terms with the past. At the very end of the movie the colors are clarified to natural tones in sunny scenes and soaring camera work that seek to convey a positive closure amidst an ambiguous conclusion.
After the class I volunteered to return the film to the library and went and watched the movie first. I was grateful for the instruction because it helped to get through the emotionally draining movie, just as the book was emotionally draining to read. Daniel's survival in the end is about telling the story. To be able to go on he must tell the tale.
Sunday, March 9, 2008
Prof. Meeropol Sets The Stage Again.
CL201Mar06, 2008
Prof. Meeropol sets the stage again, this time for The Book of Daniel, with a lecture on the political underpinnings of the book. Describing the Old Left and the New Left, he prepared us for the book's inter-generational frame of reference. As he did with Ragtime, Prof. Meeropol gave us a social history, this time with an emphasis on the political aspect of Left politics, so we know how to understand the novel in its historical context.
In the way this colloquium is sequenced we are picking up where Billy Bathgate leaves off. During the Great Depression the Old Left was in its heyday, and the Socialist and Communist parties were at their greatest popularity, reflecting the economic conditions of the time. The economic impact of WWII is arguably what ends the Great Depression and contributes to the demise of the Old Left.
Ironically, the economic impact of WWII marks a revolution in the economic theories of capitalism itself. The Classical Theory with its Laissez-faire policies is challenged by the interventonist Neo-Classical theory of John Maynard Keynes. The Keynesian revolution is vindicated, and at the same time hijacked, by the massive example of Government participation in the economy in the form of WWII. Gigantic military budgets thenceforth become the linchpin of the U.S. economy.
After the defeat of Germany's Nazism and Japan's Imperialism, it is the threat of communism that becomes the justification for continuing military industrialism, with the Korean War and Nuclear Arms race internationally, and the Old Left becoming a straw man domestically, succumbing to the vigorous persecutions of McCarthyism, with ever increasing appropriations for HUAAC. A special aspect of the Old Left in the U.S.A. is the role of immigrants, who bring with them the traditional Marxist knowledge and, significantly, occupy a non-corporate niche in the U.S. economy, as small independent producers and intellectual professionals. As time goes by, beginning with conscription into the war effort and political persecution, this base is slowly absorbed into the corporate sector, though a significant vestige remains in existence to this day. The other bastion of traditional Marxism is the Labor Unions, who fall prey to union busting strategies and tactics that was part and parcel of McCarthyism, not to mention the Unions' own history of corruption, underworld connections (briefly glimpsed in Billy Bathgate) and self interest over the years, becoming "closed shops" that practice racial, gender and religious discrimination.
The New Left, then, is distinctly non-traditional in that the centrality of Labor issues is displaced. There seem to be even more fundamental questions of the dignity of human existence in the struggles for gender and civil rights, against conscription and the nuclear arms race. College students are the leading force in the New Left, making the displacement of labor functional as well as structural, that is, not only are they not workers, but they are children of privileged classes. This very displacement, in turn, signals the limitations of the New Left. The little victories of ending conscription, granting voting rights etc., pale in the big defeat of failing to address fundamental labor issues that remain dormant, seething below the surface.
Enough time has passed that the term "New Left" seems anachronistic now, two generations later, but the name persists as its spirit is recounted by graybeards like E.L.D., Prof Meeropol, and, if I may be allowed the privilege of elevating my scruffy chin to that noble company, yours truly. We can note that the dynamics of the Left have been driven by economic and political contingencies, and such contingencies have taken new forms and faces today. With the fall of the Soviet Union, the triumph of Capitalism and its ever intensifying globalization, the rise of terrorism, the impending recession and the coming presidential elections, we can only be sure that another Left turn is around the corner.
Prof. Meeropol sets the stage again, this time for The Book of Daniel, with a lecture on the political underpinnings of the book. Describing the Old Left and the New Left, he prepared us for the book's inter-generational frame of reference. As he did with Ragtime, Prof. Meeropol gave us a social history, this time with an emphasis on the political aspect of Left politics, so we know how to understand the novel in its historical context.
In the way this colloquium is sequenced we are picking up where Billy Bathgate leaves off. During the Great Depression the Old Left was in its heyday, and the Socialist and Communist parties were at their greatest popularity, reflecting the economic conditions of the time. The economic impact of WWII is arguably what ends the Great Depression and contributes to the demise of the Old Left.
Ironically, the economic impact of WWII marks a revolution in the economic theories of capitalism itself. The Classical Theory with its Laissez-faire policies is challenged by the interventonist Neo-Classical theory of John Maynard Keynes. The Keynesian revolution is vindicated, and at the same time hijacked, by the massive example of Government participation in the economy in the form of WWII. Gigantic military budgets thenceforth become the linchpin of the U.S. economy.
After the defeat of Germany's Nazism and Japan's Imperialism, it is the threat of communism that becomes the justification for continuing military industrialism, with the Korean War and Nuclear Arms race internationally, and the Old Left becoming a straw man domestically, succumbing to the vigorous persecutions of McCarthyism, with ever increasing appropriations for HUAAC. A special aspect of the Old Left in the U.S.A. is the role of immigrants, who bring with them the traditional Marxist knowledge and, significantly, occupy a non-corporate niche in the U.S. economy, as small independent producers and intellectual professionals. As time goes by, beginning with conscription into the war effort and political persecution, this base is slowly absorbed into the corporate sector, though a significant vestige remains in existence to this day. The other bastion of traditional Marxism is the Labor Unions, who fall prey to union busting strategies and tactics that was part and parcel of McCarthyism, not to mention the Unions' own history of corruption, underworld connections (briefly glimpsed in Billy Bathgate) and self interest over the years, becoming "closed shops" that practice racial, gender and religious discrimination.
The New Left, then, is distinctly non-traditional in that the centrality of Labor issues is displaced. There seem to be even more fundamental questions of the dignity of human existence in the struggles for gender and civil rights, against conscription and the nuclear arms race. College students are the leading force in the New Left, making the displacement of labor functional as well as structural, that is, not only are they not workers, but they are children of privileged classes. This very displacement, in turn, signals the limitations of the New Left. The little victories of ending conscription, granting voting rights etc., pale in the big defeat of failing to address fundamental labor issues that remain dormant, seething below the surface.
Enough time has passed that the term "New Left" seems anachronistic now, two generations later, but the name persists as its spirit is recounted by graybeards like E.L.D., Prof Meeropol, and, if I may be allowed the privilege of elevating my scruffy chin to that noble company, yours truly. We can note that the dynamics of the Left have been driven by economic and political contingencies, and such contingencies have taken new forms and faces today. With the fall of the Soviet Union, the triumph of Capitalism and its ever intensifying globalization, the rise of terrorism, the impending recession and the coming presidential elections, we can only be sure that another Left turn is around the corner.
Saturday, March 1, 2008
Prof. Baick on Billy Bathgate
CL201Feb28, 2008
Prof. Baick, Billy Bathgate: Film vs. Book.
Prof. Baick was hamming it up five minutes before start of class, working the audience as he tested the microphone. With ceaseless energy he got the class involved in reading out loud, calling on individual students and reading along with them. His heroic efforts were fueled with humor and dedicated to the cause of student participation.
Comparing movie and novel, we were urged to look beyond the few pluses on the side of film and realize the many depths of text. Watching movies is a passive consumption, which is fine, but reading is an active production which goes further. The film is a packaged delivery of the book while reading it is a re-creation of it.
Reading brings us closer to the real historical context, reminding us of the purpose of E.L.D.'s historical fiction. In his turn, E.L.D. is to historical reality as the film is to the book. The author repackages history for us in the form of the fictional novel and delivers us to the doorsteps of historical reality. Captivated by the story, we are freed to take a detached view of a painful reality that would be no entertainment by itself, and may even be unbearable to learn about in depth.
Being an inhabitant of the locale and with his history backround, Prof Baick sees many layers of meaning in the city settings, the neighborhoods, streets and monuments, towns and countryside portrayed in the novel. Reading about fictional characters and their doings reflects on real people and their experiences. We enrich our understanding by our knowledge of prevailing conditions of the time and place, and the events that led up to it. In the historical sequence with The March, Ragtime, now Billy Bathgate and leading up to The Book of Daniel, we get to ride the crest of a giant wave of a century of history.
Prof. Baick reminded us that the Great Depression is the context of Billy Bathgate, when crime was an open secret and a path out of poverty, at least for some such as Billy, and remains so to this day! We learn through Billy something about reality that I, for one, am glad to be spared the experience of. Gangland, with its crime, prostitution, violence and abuse is a separate underworld that distracts us momentarily from the same qualities that prevail in mainstream reality, which I can now regard at arm's length, and understand my fascination with Mobster films in general and Billy Bathgate in particular.
The activities of crime organizations occupies a vacuum that is expanded by the retreat of corporate capitalism as a result of the Great Depression. Dutch Schultz can afford to spread money around in an impoverished county in upstate New York to buy a not-guilty verdict on his trial. Saratoga appears as an oasis of wealth in the desert of rural New York, but we do not see the real breadth of the economic structure behind it, just the horses. Pervasive and real as they may be, gangs are still marginal in the overall economic context.
In the movie, The Godfather, Michael Corleone, trying to persuade Kaye Adams to marry him, assures her that his father is just like any businessman or senator, and the business will be completely legit in five years. Kaye responds heatedly that Michael is being naive, that senators don't arrange to have people killed and Michael quietly retorts, "Now who's being naive?".
Prof. Baick, Billy Bathgate: Film vs. Book.
Prof. Baick was hamming it up five minutes before start of class, working the audience as he tested the microphone. With ceaseless energy he got the class involved in reading out loud, calling on individual students and reading along with them. His heroic efforts were fueled with humor and dedicated to the cause of student participation.
Comparing movie and novel, we were urged to look beyond the few pluses on the side of film and realize the many depths of text. Watching movies is a passive consumption, which is fine, but reading is an active production which goes further. The film is a packaged delivery of the book while reading it is a re-creation of it.
Reading brings us closer to the real historical context, reminding us of the purpose of E.L.D.'s historical fiction. In his turn, E.L.D. is to historical reality as the film is to the book. The author repackages history for us in the form of the fictional novel and delivers us to the doorsteps of historical reality. Captivated by the story, we are freed to take a detached view of a painful reality that would be no entertainment by itself, and may even be unbearable to learn about in depth.
Being an inhabitant of the locale and with his history backround, Prof Baick sees many layers of meaning in the city settings, the neighborhoods, streets and monuments, towns and countryside portrayed in the novel. Reading about fictional characters and their doings reflects on real people and their experiences. We enrich our understanding by our knowledge of prevailing conditions of the time and place, and the events that led up to it. In the historical sequence with The March, Ragtime, now Billy Bathgate and leading up to The Book of Daniel, we get to ride the crest of a giant wave of a century of history.
Prof. Baick reminded us that the Great Depression is the context of Billy Bathgate, when crime was an open secret and a path out of poverty, at least for some such as Billy, and remains so to this day! We learn through Billy something about reality that I, for one, am glad to be spared the experience of. Gangland, with its crime, prostitution, violence and abuse is a separate underworld that distracts us momentarily from the same qualities that prevail in mainstream reality, which I can now regard at arm's length, and understand my fascination with Mobster films in general and Billy Bathgate in particular.
The activities of crime organizations occupies a vacuum that is expanded by the retreat of corporate capitalism as a result of the Great Depression. Dutch Schultz can afford to spread money around in an impoverished county in upstate New York to buy a not-guilty verdict on his trial. Saratoga appears as an oasis of wealth in the desert of rural New York, but we do not see the real breadth of the economic structure behind it, just the horses. Pervasive and real as they may be, gangs are still marginal in the overall economic context.
In the movie, The Godfather, Michael Corleone, trying to persuade Kaye Adams to marry him, assures her that his father is just like any businessman or senator, and the business will be completely legit in five years. Kaye responds heatedly that Michael is being naive, that senators don't arrange to have people killed and Michael quietly retorts, "Now who's being naive?".
Saturday, February 16, 2008
Prof. Rhodes on Ragtime
CL201, Feb 14, 2008
Comical interruptions started with a moment of embarassment for the Prof. when the audio was turned up too high, and again with a lot of futile bumbling about with the curtain concealing the blackboard, costing precious minutes in a short class period. Time did run out on the lecture and I was left wondering if there wasn't a page at the end that was never got to...
Prof. Rhodes started with an unequivocal endorsement of E.L.D., staking his personal scholarship and professional position on the commitment. Those qualities also make his lecture highly instructive in how to go about reading, in general, and Ragtime in particular.
Taking the bull by the horns, Prof. Rhodes confronted us with perhaps the most salacious passage in the book by reading it out loud. The scene occurs early in the novel and it is not until near the end, at the story's very climax, that the other shoe drops.
"...the semi-fictional cast of Ragtime are at times presented as puppet victims of history, jerked around in both comic and tragic ways by overwhelming forces, whether of repressed sexuality or institutionalized racism: Younger Brother by the rampant penis that "whips him about the floor" at the lesbian encounter of Emma Nesbitt and Emma Goldman (55), Coalhouse Walker by the firing squad that jerks the body about the street "in a sequence of attitudes as if it were trying to mop up its own blood"(222)". (Derek Wright, "Ragtime Revisited: History and Fiction in Doctorow's Novel", International Fiction Review, Vol. 20, No. 1, 1993, pp.14-16.)
I learnt somewhere that in French "l'petit mort" or "the little death" is a colloquialism for sexual orgasm. That connects the early passage to the climactic real death at the end.
Comical interruptions started with a moment of embarassment for the Prof. when the audio was turned up too high, and again with a lot of futile bumbling about with the curtain concealing the blackboard, costing precious minutes in a short class period. Time did run out on the lecture and I was left wondering if there wasn't a page at the end that was never got to...
Prof. Rhodes started with an unequivocal endorsement of E.L.D., staking his personal scholarship and professional position on the commitment. Those qualities also make his lecture highly instructive in how to go about reading, in general, and Ragtime in particular.
Taking the bull by the horns, Prof. Rhodes confronted us with perhaps the most salacious passage in the book by reading it out loud. The scene occurs early in the novel and it is not until near the end, at the story's very climax, that the other shoe drops.
"...the semi-fictional cast of Ragtime are at times presented as puppet victims of history, jerked around in both comic and tragic ways by overwhelming forces, whether of repressed sexuality or institutionalized racism: Younger Brother by the rampant penis that "whips him about the floor" at the lesbian encounter of Emma Nesbitt and Emma Goldman (55), Coalhouse Walker by the firing squad that jerks the body about the street "in a sequence of attitudes as if it were trying to mop up its own blood"(222)". (Derek Wright, "Ragtime Revisited: History and Fiction in Doctorow's Novel", International Fiction Review, Vol. 20, No. 1, 1993, pp.14-16.)
I learnt somewhere that in French "l'petit mort" or "the little death" is a colloquialism for sexual orgasm. That connects the early passage to the climactic real death at the end.
Sunday, February 10, 2008
Prof. Meeropol Sets the Stage for Ragtime
CL201Feb06,2008
Prof. Meeropol set the stage for Ragtime, focusing in some depth on the changes in economic structure since the Civil War, and aspects of racism, linking the reading of The March to the reading of Ragtime. The main point was the transformation of the economy from being mainly a collection of small independent producers to being dominated by large corporations, monopolies and "Robber Barons". Henry Ford is the archetype in manufacturing while J. P. Morgan represents financial domination.
As I was walking up from the parking lot I spied Prof. Meeropol hurrying into Sleith, holding a sheaf of papers. Just as he made his way in, one sheet fell out of the bundle in his hand. Following behind him came a tall, blond man. He picked up the fallen sheet and became absorbed in reading it as I sidled up along the wall and peered around the corner, catching a brief glimpse of what was written on the paper. I could only make out a few disjointed words and phrases: "Reasons for the transition from Ancients to Corporate"... "Lumpy Capital Projects, e.g., Railways ... "role of Chinese labor"..."Segregation in Ford's factories: Reducing racial frictions or implementing racial stereotypes of specialization?"
Late for class due to the distraction, I wondered how the Professor would adapt. Sure enough, he hesitated briefly at one point, and his lecture ended early, but being the consummate speaker that he is, he threw out some extra questions for discussion. Is violence the only effective agent of social change? Idealistically, I would certainly hope not, but realistically, I can see hate and greed prevailing against reason quite universally.
My mind kept going back to the dropped page. In the intersection between economics and race there may be some answers to the violent aspects of race relations, specifically in the subtler violence of social theft embodied by exploitation. Perhaps Prof. Meeropol will comment on the dropped page, or Prof. Winthrop will shed light on the matter when he speaks on Ragtime in the next class meeting.
Prof. Meeropol set the stage for Ragtime, focusing in some depth on the changes in economic structure since the Civil War, and aspects of racism, linking the reading of The March to the reading of Ragtime. The main point was the transformation of the economy from being mainly a collection of small independent producers to being dominated by large corporations, monopolies and "Robber Barons". Henry Ford is the archetype in manufacturing while J. P. Morgan represents financial domination.
As I was walking up from the parking lot I spied Prof. Meeropol hurrying into Sleith, holding a sheaf of papers. Just as he made his way in, one sheet fell out of the bundle in his hand. Following behind him came a tall, blond man. He picked up the fallen sheet and became absorbed in reading it as I sidled up along the wall and peered around the corner, catching a brief glimpse of what was written on the paper. I could only make out a few disjointed words and phrases: "Reasons for the transition from Ancients to Corporate"... "Lumpy Capital Projects, e.g., Railways ... "role of Chinese labor"..."Segregation in Ford's factories: Reducing racial frictions or implementing racial stereotypes of specialization?"
Late for class due to the distraction, I wondered how the Professor would adapt. Sure enough, he hesitated briefly at one point, and his lecture ended early, but being the consummate speaker that he is, he threw out some extra questions for discussion. Is violence the only effective agent of social change? Idealistically, I would certainly hope not, but realistically, I can see hate and greed prevailing against reason quite universally.
My mind kept going back to the dropped page. In the intersection between economics and race there may be some answers to the violent aspects of race relations, specifically in the subtler violence of social theft embodied by exploitation. Perhaps Prof. Meeropol will comment on the dropped page, or Prof. Winthrop will shed light on the matter when he speaks on Ragtime in the next class meeting.
Saturday, February 2, 2008
Prof. Beagle on The March
CL201, Jan31,2008
Prof. Beagle's lecture on The March will be posted and we should have a link to it. The lecture was a commentary that wraps up our reading of the book. The main point of the lecture is that the noble cause of freedom's war against slavery is definitive, and yet there is ambiguity in the conduct of the war. The lecture explores the conflicting emotions and moralities through the course of the novel, telling us how it felt as opposed to the historian's question about why it happened.
As we leave the story behind I wonder about its aftermath. The "class war" was aimed at dismantling the plantation system, to uproot the socio-economic basis of slavery, but what would replace it? In the context of the time, "freedom" was bringing forth the "free-market" economy, but not right away. First the vacuum is filled by a reversal to an "ancient economy" of independent producers, family farms with only their own labor, to begin with. (Remember Scarlett O'Hara getting blisters on her hands from holding the plow towards the end of "Gone With the Wind"?) Sharecropping would become prevalent, putting poor whites and freed slaves into an economic structure that would breed the next stage of racism, on the very grave of slavery. And when Capitalism's "free market" does flourish, we cling to the image of freedom to this day, even as we sell our life's duration by the hour.
One of the discussants at the end of the lecture pointed out a link between The March and the next reading, "Ragtime". There is a minor character in The March named Coalhouse Walker. In Ragtime Coalhouse Walker Jr. is a major player, arguably the central character. Although The March is E. L. Doctorow's most recent novel and Ragtime was written over thrity years ago, the writer is able to put them in chronological order with a connecting link in the name of Coalhouse Walker.
Prof. Beagle's lecture on The March will be posted and we should have a link to it. The lecture was a commentary that wraps up our reading of the book. The main point of the lecture is that the noble cause of freedom's war against slavery is definitive, and yet there is ambiguity in the conduct of the war. The lecture explores the conflicting emotions and moralities through the course of the novel, telling us how it felt as opposed to the historian's question about why it happened.
As we leave the story behind I wonder about its aftermath. The "class war" was aimed at dismantling the plantation system, to uproot the socio-economic basis of slavery, but what would replace it? In the context of the time, "freedom" was bringing forth the "free-market" economy, but not right away. First the vacuum is filled by a reversal to an "ancient economy" of independent producers, family farms with only their own labor, to begin with. (Remember Scarlett O'Hara getting blisters on her hands from holding the plow towards the end of "Gone With the Wind"?) Sharecropping would become prevalent, putting poor whites and freed slaves into an economic structure that would breed the next stage of racism, on the very grave of slavery. And when Capitalism's "free market" does flourish, we cling to the image of freedom to this day, even as we sell our life's duration by the hour.
One of the discussants at the end of the lecture pointed out a link between The March and the next reading, "Ragtime". There is a minor character in The March named Coalhouse Walker. In Ragtime Coalhouse Walker Jr. is a major player, arguably the central character. Although The March is E. L. Doctorow's most recent novel and Ragtime was written over thrity years ago, the writer is able to put them in chronological order with a connecting link in the name of Coalhouse Walker.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)