LITR 4232 American Renaissance

Melville, Billy Budd (complete)

Thursday, 30 March: Melville, Billy Budd (complete)

Web-highlighter: Tallia Ortiz (final exams on Billy Budd)

Whitman assignments

Douglass's lifespan: 1818-1895

Melville's lifespan: 1819-1891

Whitman's lifespan: 1819-1892

Tuesday, 4 April: Walt Whitman, introduction +  “There Was a Child Went Forth” (handout) + selections from Song of Myself : sections 1-5, 19, 21, 24, 32-34, 46-52.

introduction 2920-23

Song of Myself begins 2937

later version of Song of Myself

sections 1-5, 19, 21, 24, 32-34, 46-52

Overall point of study of Whitman:

Readers today find his style of poetry familiar--wide-open in terms of style and subject matter

But in the mid-1800s Whitman was a revolutionary--no one had written poetry like his before

"free verse" instead of structured, rhymed, parsed lines

poetry not just about pretty, heroic, or uplifting subjects, but poetry about intimacies and complexities of personal and cultural life

Thursday, 6 April: Whitman, “Crossing Brooklyn Ferry.”

Reader: Susan Hooks

Tuesday, 11 April: Hawthorne, from Abraham Lincoln. Abraham Lincoln, “Gettysburg Address” + “Second Inaugural Address.” Research Project due.

Reader: Susanne Brooks

Thursday, 13 April: Whitman, “When Lilacs Last in the Dooryard Bloom’d”

"Great" Classic Writers

Who are the greatest classic writers in American literature?

Who do serious readers regard the most seriously, write about most, refer to often for standards and achievements?

Which writers wrote not just some promising literature but a lot of literature that stands at a very high achievement?

Classical periods (mostly Greece and Rome):

Homer, Horace, Sophocles, Euripides, Plato, Aristotle, Virgil

+ Scriptures

The Bible

The Koran

The Bhagavad-Gita

World Literature

France: Victor Hugo, Balzac, Dumas, Rimbaud, Baudelaire

Germany: Goethe, Schiller, Thomas Mann

Spain: Cervantes, Federico Garcia Lorca

Argentina: Jorge Luis Borges

British literature

Shakespeare

Milton

Chaucer

Beowulf poet

Wordsworth

Keats, Blake, Coleridge, Shelley, Byron

Jane Austen, Dickens, George Eliot, the Brontes, Thomas Hardy

D. H. Lawrence, William Butler Yeats

American Literature

William Faulkner (Mississippi novelist, The Sound and the Fury, etc.)

Melville

Whitman

Dickinson

Henry James

Emerson

Eugene O'Neill

Hawthorne

Hemingway

Fitzgerald

Edith Wharton

Wallace Stevens

T. S. Eliot

Elizabeth Bishop

Mark Twain

Toni Morrison

Poe

Flannery O'Connor

Thoreau

Douglass

Stowe

Cooper?

How to define a classic text?

Mark Twain: "A classic is a book that everybody wants to have read, but nobody wants to read."

More classical definition:

Literature that exemplifies goodness, truth, beauty.

"The Canon"

What books is an educated person expected to know?

What is "required reading?"

Many changes in recent decades--when universities were the domain of white men, read white male authors almost exclusively

As college population becomes more diverse, "the canon" responds by featuring more diverse authors and texts--some "new classics" are discovered

Practical definition:

"A book that stays open . . . "

Contrast popular literature: read it and done, close the book and move on to a new one; any discussion generally limited to period of initial publication

Classic literature:

Read the book and, one way or another, it stays with you

Find people talking about it, even centuries after published

Texts are re-published, re-performed, made into movies

Institutional support: schools, academies, colleges, universities, libraries as repositories and promoters of cultural memory

Not just a mausoleum that never changes, though--some classics fall out of reading lists, others are added

Test of greatness or "classic stature":

Does the book continue to create meaning for new generations of readers?

Contrast popular literature: fits the moment, but when the moment passes, so does the art

A classic text continues to be productive of meaning

In contrast to books that can be closed, a classic demands to be re-opened, re-examined--and it rewards doing so

e. g., Billy Budd--whether you like it or not, something's going on, and some of you will revisit in your minds, your studies, your conversations . . . .

How does a classic text create meaning?

No simple answers, few simple characters

Did Captain Vere do the right thing? Was Billy justified in striking Claggart?

Not "moralism" or simple right and wrong . . . 

but "morality" . . . 

explorations of right and wrong, not declarations of right and wrong

admission of complexity, acceptance of ambiguity both in situations and yourself

not just confirmation of what you already believe and know, but opportunity to learn and grow . . . and become humble rather than arrogant

Problem: humans are lazy, would just as soon not think

Or if they do think, they want quick, direct, self-confirming answers

Duty of intellectuals to be wary of such instincts--whenever you find yourself feeling especially righteous and vindicated

Example from Billy Budd 

2783 Billy as Christ-like sacrifice

Temptation to reduce meaning: Billy Budd is a retelling or allegory of the story of Christ

A class can talk about that, but it already feels like we've lost Billy Budd to the Bible

A classic text won't be reduced to so simple a meaning . . .

2756 Then would Claggart look like the man of sorrows [a sobriquet for Christ]

What are the points at which you feel like you gain something from this complexity?

At what points is it simply frustrating?

In what ways does such "high learning" remain literature and not just philosophy?

(Horace: purpose of literature to entertain and educate)

Whitman as "greatest" American poet

doesn't mean "finest" poet

but influential, develops poetry in new ways

revolutions in style, subject matter of poetry

How can you tell it's a Whitman poem?

How does Whitman meet the classic standard of truth and beauty not being dumb and simple?

review

critical thinking: don't just learn facts & numbers

rather, practice thinking, reapply to new situations

Problem in literature: Are we talking about ideas or about stories, characters, the pleasures of reading?

Literature gives form and expression to ideas.

Stories have meaning, or we wouldn't tell them.

For example . . .

light and dark as good and evil

or 

light and dark as plain light of day vs. mysterious shadows of night

ideas take form in literature, possibility of action, interaction, interpretation

not just classic literature

popular literature: tends to be more show than tell, but ideas are implicit. The only catch is that the ideas are already familiar, comfortable. The story and its ideas confirm what you already think rather than questioning and raising new possibilities.

Anyway, literature enacts ideas. Characters stand for something. 

:

familiar example

"fair lady" vs. "dark lady"

Last of the Mohicans: Alice & Cora

"Ligeia": Rowena & Ligiea

examples in soap operas, other popular culture

This dualism or interplay can be transposed from feminine to masculine characters

example of how literature uses familiar forms to set up characters and their meanings (which can then be complicated)

But also can use such patterns as "starters" for further insight.

For instance, both Melville and Cooper don't just set up the "dark" figure as a bad guy, but complicate the personalities of Claggart and Magua so that the reader can sympathize (a little) and the villain is humanized. (Humanizing the villain may seem weak--for instance, no one seems willing to humanize Osama bin Laden--but doing so makes the world a little bigger and richer, like finding beauty in an unexpected place.)

But Melville's also a little deeper than Cooper:

Cooper totally idealizes Uncas: he's beautiful, courageous, noble, selfless, obedient to his father, attentive to Cora. The only thing that gets to him is that Magua is an older, stronger warrior who can beat him one-on-one.

Melville admires Billy but constantly exposes the problems or undersides of his beauty and innocence.

2662 he was illiterate

2662 Of self-consciousness he seemed to have little or none, or about as much as we may reasonably impute to a dog . . . .

2675 that's because he's down on you, Baby Budd

2686 innocence was his blinder . . . never did it occur

Innocence is good . . . and wrong?

F. Scott Fitzgerald, from The Crack-Up

The test of a first-rate intelligence is the ability to hold two opposed ideas in the mind at the same time, and still retain the ability to function.

Sample final exams on moral complexity in Billy Budd

2004 finals:

     In Melville’s Billy Budd, the simplicity of the narrative belies the thematic and structural complexity of the work.  On its face, the story is about a sailor executed for killing a superior officer in the midst of war.  But even a reader unfamiliar with Melville’s style senses the intellectual rigor and moral gravity of the piece.  Billy Budd is an impressed, or conscripted, seaman of late 18^th century Britain.  Billy is a physically beautiful but intellectually simple man.  Well liked by the crew, he is a vision of “Adam before the fall”.  His innocence, though, becomes a fatal flaw, which leads to his destruction. From a mythological standpoint, Billy would seem to fit the pattern of the Christ figure found in much of Western literature.  But the complexity of Billy’s character does not perfectly lead itself to an allegorical representation.  Billy is inarticulate and at times rashly violent.  At best he is a fractured or splintered Christ figure.  Such a depiction lends itself to the moral complexity of the tale.

            Britain is facing a mortal threat from France and conscripts unsuspecting seamen to fight in the navy.  In a few instances, the conscripts stage mutinies as in the case of the Nore.  Though Billy is a willing and pliant participant in the impressments scheme, the threat of potential violence hangs heavily over the Bellipotent. This threat drives the plot.

            John Claggart, the master of arms and primary antagonist, concocts a scheme to ensnare Billy into mutiny.  Claggart despises Billy but gives no reason but envy as to the source of his appreciable disdain.  Melville comments that Claggart possesses an “elemental evil” and a “natural depravity” that wills him toward this dark path.  Claggart does not get Billy to get involved in a mutinous plot but does report to the captain of the ship, Edward Vere, that Billy is in fact a malevolent and scheming force among the men. Though Claggart’s character is depicted as duplicitous and insidious, he too has shafts of divinity shining through his suspect moral framework.  Claggart catches a vision of Billy at the top of a mast and witnesses Billy in all of his Hyperion beauty.   Claggart arrives at an evanescent epiphany. When he sees Billy, “his eyes become strangely suffused with incipient tears.”  Melville adds, “Then would Claggart look like the man of sorrows.”  Claggart too becomes a fractured Christ figure.  Again Melville’s moral complexity does not allow Claggart simply to be Satan transfigured to the waters of the 18^th century Atlantic.  Claggart too is drawn into the continuum of the human condition.

            Captain Vere is also a splintered Christ figure. Vere is the only witness to Claggart’s murder and only judge of Billy’s fate.  Vere is intellectual and well regarded by his peers.  But he is remote from the crew.  Still his paternal fondness for Billy Budd displays Vere’s knowledge of human nature.  Vere distrusts Claggart’s tale about Billy’s complicity in a mutinous plot.  But when Billy kills Claggart, Vere divines Billy’s tragic fate at the murder of Claggart: “Struck dead by an angel of God! Yet the angel must hang!” Vere’s quick judgment sends Billy to the gallows.  Some critics have argued that Vere’s judgment disqualifies him from any consideration as a Christ figure.  But Vere is a man of sorrows, even muttering Billy’s name on his deathbed.   Because of his rash judgment, Vere is not a clean transfiguration of Christ.  Like Billy and Claggart, Vere serves as a facet from which human nature and the human condition can be considered. [DG]

2002 finals:

 . . . Another author who deals with human nature in a very stark way is Herman Melville.  In his story, Billy Budd, the reader encounters characters that are forced to make decisions and react in ways that they would not normally encounter.  The story takes place on a ship at sea.  As background it is shown that mutiny has become a major problem and fear for captains.  The three characters that are shown dealing with moral struggles are Billy Budd, the handsome sailor, Claggart, and Captain Vere. 

            Billy's struggle comes from an accident that takes place with Claggart.  Billy is a lovable, friendly, innocent boy.  He is forced to look at the potential for a man to have a dark side.  He wants to trust Claggart, but there are incidents that lead him to believe that he cannot.  We see Billy trying to reconcile this situation with what he has known before about men.  Finally when Claggart accuses him of treason, Billy snaps and kills Claggart.

            Claggart is at the opposite end of the moral spectrum.  He is not innocent or lovable.  He seems to be a normal, well-adjusted man until he comes into contact with Billy.  Melville tells us that Claggart is a man with a natural depravity.  He has darkness in him that he may or may not be aware of, but it is there.  His object that brings this out is Billy.  Claggart realizes that his feelings towards Billy are unjust, but he is unable to stop himself.   When he is given the opportunity to destroy Billy, an innocent person, he takes it.

            The character that is faced with the most intense dilemma is Captain Vere.  Vere is like a father figure toward Billy, yet when Billy kills Claggart; it is obvious that Vere must do something.  Melville makes it very clear that this is a dilemma.  Because of the threat of mutiny, Vere cannot afford to treat Billy lightly for his actions.  However, Vere could delay punishing Billy until they meet up with someone of higher rank than he.  This is the dilemma: whether to make an example of Billy, who has murdered an officer or to risk his own livelihood and that of the ship by letting Billy potentially go unpunished.

            Vere orders a drumhead court, and Billy is sentenced to death.  At the time the reader gets the sense that Vere has done what he had to do, but Melville does not commit himself to this decision.  When Vere is dying he speaks Billy's name.  The complexity and depth of this dilemma stops Melville from saying clearly what is right or wrong.

            In both of these authors' works the reader is led to see that there is more than one way to look at any situation.  For most people the simple reaction to moral situations is to distance themselves, either by saying something is right or wrong, or that it is no one's business if it is right or wrong.  These authors refuse to do either; instead they delve right into the middle of the situation and try to dig their way out.  While they might not come up with a distinct answer, they allow the reader to learn and question and make their own decisions.  These authors, along with many other classic authors of this time show how complex life can be.  By studying these authors and their works, we allow students to put themselves into morally trying situations and open their minds to the different possible outcomes. [KP]

mass market (popular literature)

"social" pleasures: action, laughs

sentiment: familiar, socially-reinforced emotions like parental love (or negative flip: child abuse), stereotypes like faithful servants, humble poor (or negative flip: vicious thugs) ; "self & other" starkly contrasted (white hats / black hats)

clearly drawn characters, heroes and villains

style matches subject: simple and clearly drawn

message to reader: "self-congratulation": what you thought was right turns out to be right

reader gains: escape, kill time, confirm worldview/prejudices, plus social reinforcement, group bonding

art (classic literature)

less action, more significance--when someone dies, not just a "body count"

not obvious sentiment, but subtle manipulations, wit, irony, self-conscious manipulations, twists 

ambiguous characters, mixed
2695 innocence and guilt had changed places;

style matches subject: complex and multilayered

message to reader: "self-criticism": your instincts, gut responses, sentiments must be constantly revised according to experience, analysis, complications

reader's advantage: rigorous intellectual/moral exercise, challenge simplifications/reductions; gains individuation but may lose group bonding, reinforcement 

2694 every one must determine for himself

cinema examples: "blockbuster" movies vs. "independent" films

Melville's style

Elizabethan syntax, diction ("Elizabethan" style gains prestige through Shakespeare and King James Bible)

rhetorical portentousness--cf. William Faulkner, 20th century novelist (maybe greatest American writer of all): Absalom! Absalom!, The Sound and the Fury, Light in August

mythic allusions, backgrounds, proportions (also compare Faulkner, Toni Morrison)

archaic diction

technical diction (parts of ship, etc.: hawsers)

qualifiers--may have, could havecf. Hawthorne

 "Young Goodman Brown"

2191 as if

2187 might have been taken for father and son

2187 may have been an ocular deception . . . uncertain light

Billy Budd
2695 here he may or may not have erred [qualifiers]
2696 perhaps deviated from general custom

double negatives--"indirection"
2668 double negative
2681  “not unreluctantly”
2688 “the language of no uneducated man”
2701 not improbable
2710 big with no prosaic significance
2711 “Billy Budd, Billy Budd”—not the accents of remorse

2665 digression

range of allusion

mixed characterization

2677 indirection

2679 theological depth: "mystery of iniquity"

questions rather than statements:
2693 "Fated boy! . . . What have you done?"
2694 Was he unhinged?
2694 where does one begin and the other end?

2693 "fated boy" [note efficiency, lightness and quickness of profound note]

mythic profundity

great authors like Melville, Faulkner, Morrison (or beyond America, James Joyce, William Butler Yeats) achieve mythic proportions in their work by using previous myths in at least a couple of ways.

1. allusion (i. e., references to myths, whether "classical" or "Judeo-Christian")

2. aligning their narratives with the narratives of myths, which often involve ritual elements such as initiation, sacrifice, etc.

2657 religious sacrifice

2662 -- questionable apple of knowledge

2663 much such perhaps as Adam presumably might have been ere the urbane Serpent wriggled himself into his company . . . doctrine of man's Fall . . . the envious marplot of Eden

2667 the altar and the sacrifice

2679 the comely young David

2685 Claggart as "man of sorrows" (Jesus)

2690 a statue of young Adam before the Fall

2692 serpent fascination

2692 condemned vestal priestess

2692 crucifixion

2693 Ananias + angel of God

2700 Last Assizes shall acquit

2702 Abraham and Isaac

2708 Lamb of God seen in mystical vision

2710 Orpheus

2712 spar from which Billy hanged = piece of the cross

paradox of tragedy: greatest of genres: "success" satisfies status quo; ambitious failure tests limits, affords glimpses of possibilities

cf. Cora and Uncas--glimpse of possibilities, which remain great for being not completely realized (cf. assassinated Kennedys vs. Ted Kennedy)

2713 [cf. Cora and Uncas]

Gothic

2673 converging wires of underground influence
2687 Claggart from cavernous sphere
2704 [gothic lighting]