LITR 4232: American Renaissance
UHCL, spring 2002
Sample Student Answers to Final Exam

Essay question 2. A constantly-changing society like America—where, like Rip Van Winkle, each of us wakes up every day to a new world with new fashions, new values, and new rules—constantly stimulates questions of appropriate moral insight and behavior.

            The most standard or reflexive reactions to the shock of change are simplistic solutions, either moralistic--“A woman’s place is in the home,” “It’s their fault,” and “Just say no”--or amoral: "Live and let live," "You are not the judge of me," "As long as you feel all right . . . ."

            In contrast, a quality that seems consistent in classic writers like Hawthorne, Whitman, Dickinson, and Melville or in great leaders like Lincoln is the complexity or ambiguity with which they represent moral situations.

            Referring to writings by at least two of these five writers (and to any others for comparison or contrast), describe how human problems of good and evil are depicted vividly but without a simple, reductive moral judgment of who is right or wrong, or innocent or guilty.

 

[complete answer from email exam]

Hawthorne and Melville present readers with characters who embody good and evil.  They meet the Puritan and Christian view of their past and of  their present society with a more open and accepting view of these qualities with humans.  As the strict religious views that these writers challenge separate truth into black and white, men into good and evil, Hawthorne and Melville reject this division and present readers with a somewhat open field of intertwining qualities.  Unlike the clear definition of saint and sinner, or perfect and flawed man of the common beliefs founded before and during the time of these writings, the works of these writers exhibit weakness and strength among their characters.  This is shown to the reader who can then interpret as his or her own experiences, beliefs, and emotions will allow.  No set point of perfection is communicated throughout the writings of these authors, as the reader is not given any concrete or clear truths in the lives of the people they read about.

In Melville’s “Billy Budd,” a view of perfection is presented.  A young beautiful man who is innocent as well as loving towards others exists on a ship of aggressive, fighting men.  In an atmosphere of war and mistrust  these men must bond in order for the Captain to insure the safety of the ship.  A climate of brotherhood must exist. Billy Budd served this need well as  he held the crew together by his outward likeability, by which the men became uplifted by as a group.  On trying to dissuade the impressment of Billy, Captain Graveling describes him as a peacemaker. He is described as “Catholic priest striking peace in an Irish shindy.” 2659  This image blends barbaric behavior in which a Religious leader finds himself among, and in Billy’s case he can successfully dwell and affect his fellow men.  The response of Lt. Ratcliffe who is determined to remove Billy is one that sums up Billy’s identity.  The image present is one of a man of goodness who must resort even to what would be considered the antithesis in order to preserve his goodness.  On hearing that Billy had resorted to violence, a blow to a fellow sailor, in order to deal with a confrontational character, Ratcliffe responds: “well, blessed are the peacemakers, especially the fighting peacemakers.” 2659  These images of Billy Budd define him as a man of inherent goodness who has the affect of accord among men, and who will revert to violence to serve the common good.  Uncas is a character from Cooper’s Last of the Mohicans,  who can be compared to Billy. Cooper’s character embodies purity of blood unlike Billy, but he also has expectations placed upon him.  He heroicly represents the goodness of his tribe which forces him to kill in order to keep the remnants of his tribe alive.  He is a young man seen as pure, strong, brave, and handsome, and while these traits represent goodness, the reader sees them among a savagery by which this tragic hero must live.

Another character that is presented in this dualistic light is Hawthorne’s “Faith” from his short story “Young Goodman Brown.”  Faith represents innocence, and beauty, and she also provides a foundation for the reality in which her husband lives.  He looks to her as central to his world and beliefs.  Faith displays firm evidence of goodness.  Young Goodman Brown when at a crossroads in his own beliefs points to her as the one thing that held him back, he states when addressing the devil for the first time, “Faith kept me back awhile.”  Later when he is challenged by temptation as the devil shows him examples of evil within his community, Brown exclaims, “With Heaven above, and Faith below, I will stand firm against the devil.”  When “Faith” is shown also to embody sin then the young man’s world is doomed.  He cannot live a content and founded life upon a shaken or a questioned truth. Another example of female characters that exhibit some of the qualities as Faith had of goodness can also be found in Last Mohicans in Cora and Alice.  Like Faith, Alice is described as innocent and fair.  Unlike Faith she represents a goodness accepted by society that does not possess evil within.  Alice is not brave or even comfortable among the strangeness that the wilderness offers.  On the other hand Cora who is not the perfect image of society’s ideal as she is mysterious, dark skinned, and brave shows society’s blind eye to her strengths.  She does look the part of the innocent character and therefore cannot be accepted as right and good.  Here we have Faith who can seem perfect and Alice and Cora who can ultimately only live up to what society expects of them.  This contrasts the writing of Hawthorne with Cooper.  Where Cooper creates Cora who is full of good as well as mystery, she is still separate from ultimate good.  Cora was not portrayed as the innocent, fair beauty because these traits in Cooper’s book belong to the pure character of Alice.  By contrast Faith could be Alice’s twin, as she represents all that society expects, but she is capable of being tempted and possibly embracing that temptation.

Hawthorne and Melville blend the traits of good and bad within their characters to present the reader with the invitation to join in the process of discerning what is true in the stories and  in life.  By the use of allusion, indirectness, shading or blending of ideals and imperfections, the reader can no longer distinguish good guy bad guy themes.  Melville will present a reader with a statement that seems secure, and then lay in the reader’s lap a seemingly apposing view.  He tells the reader that Claggart is ominous and has a disliking for Billy, and then presents the reader with a statement that perhaps Claggart had care for him.  The ship’s captain has a dreamy way about him of getting lost in the stars and irritated at being disturbed, but controls this quickly.  Billy is a peacemaker, yet a fighter.  In Hawthorne’s Young Goodman Brown, Faith’s goodness is foreshadowed by the description of her “pink ribbons.”  The use of pink is a blending of pure white which could symbolize purity, and pure red which might symbolize evil.  The reader is invited into the stories by the allusions of the bible.  Billy Budd appears as Adam, or possibly like Jesus, he is a like a Catholic priest.  Faith is a “blessed angel on earth” and the devil throws down a stick that appears to change form that might be related to the one who challenged Moses.

Readers are quickly ushered into the story by the connection to these images that they hold in their mind.  Readers like the characters are given a bonding of separate truths, so that they may be inspired to explore their own beliefs and dualities.  When these characteristics are seen together such as good and evil, one can take from it more of an acceptance of self among others as being more alike with challenges that face each of us.  In these stories and from them we are left with a difficulty to condemn and an openness to embrace human limitation.

When texts such as these are presented to people who may or may not have their own foundation of beliefs these doors to discovery that are opened by these writers are important in order to develop sense of brotherhood with others, but should not be taught as definite guidelines of life rather as fictional stories that encourage us to react.  The important thing to remember and in keeping with the stories themes is to let those truths be come to by the students.  It is important to teach the material and to teach the benefits of the material, but each student’s beliefs or non beliefs should be respected and not tampered with.  It is not the teacher’s responsibility to convert students, but to expose them. [LL]

[Complete email essay answer]

            In classic literature we often see characters struggling with moral dilemmas.  It would be easy for the authors to simply make a decision, to say, "this is right" and "that is wrong", but they do not do that.  These authors realize that often in life there is no distinct right or wrong.  What sets these authors apart is their ability to look at a situation from different viewpoints and lead the reader to the same sense of uncertainty.  Often the authors do come to a conclusion as to what is morally right, in that particular time and place, but there is always some sense of questioning and understanding of the complexity of life.

            Two authors who seem to be the most torn in their portrayal of moral situations are Herman Melville and Emily Dickinson.  Both authors seem to be torn between what is conventionally good and what a situation or a person would consider good.  In two of Dickinson's poems there is a portrayal of struggle between convention and happiness.  The authors' sense of isolation and distance from the society in which she lived place all of her poems into that realm of struggle.  In Melville's Billy Budd we see characters torn again between what is conventionally right and what is right in a particular situation.

  

*For the purpose of clarity the two poems by Dickinson discussed will be included here:

I'm Nobody! Who are you?

Are you-Nobody-too?

Then there's a pair of us!

Don't tell! they'd banish us-you know?

 

How dreary-to be-Somebody!

How public-like a Frog-

To tell your name-the livelong June-

To an admiring Bog!

 

J.288 F.260 c. 1861   1891

 

 ***

 

This is my letter to the World

That never wrote to Me-

The simple News that Nature told-

With tender Majesty

 

Her Message is committed

To Hands I cannot see-

For Love of Her-Sweet-countrymen-

Judge tenderly-of Me

 

J.441 F. 519 c. 1862  1890

 

            In both of these poems we see a character who is struggling to relate to world around them.  In the first poem we see that character reaching out for someone to relate to.  Dickinson herself seemed to struggle throughout her life to find people that she could connect with.  Often she seemed to be discouraged by people that catered to society's ideals of what they should be.  However, in some of Dickinson's poems (like the second here) there seems to be in her a desire to be liked and accepted by that very society that she often scorns.  We see her characters confusion and internal battle.  Dickinson's poems often seem to be very personal reflections of her own feelings.  She rejected the organized religion of the time, yet in her poetry she often speaks about religion and a Higher Power that is a force in the world.  The moral struggle that we find in Dickinson's writing is this: a person at odds with the world around them, who still desires connection and understanding for and from that world. 

            Readers can learn much from Dickinson.  Most people at some time in their life find themselves on the outside of a situation, wanting to get in.  Often it is a situation that a person knows that they may not enjoy, but that desire to be accepted is still there.  To see Dickinson's battles with society in such beautiful and stark ways can teach readers to both view that world honestly and to try and understand society and human nature better.

            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]

 

[complete answer from email exam]

The popular response of society is to react with the decisive swiftness of a “knee-jerk” to the moral dilemmas presented by the actions of man, unlike classical writers' carefully weighed responses that leave the reader wondering what the correct solution should be.  In our readings of Nathaniel Hawthorne and Abraham Lincoln, in particular, the depth of complexity becomes a central issue posed by the writer in the overwhelming sense of ambiguity and careful avoidance of any hint of underlying prejudice toward a particular conclusion.  With moral non-judgment, these writers present questions for the reader to answer within his own mind.  There are no right or wrong answers, no black and white answers, for how societies issues should be resolved because they, like the gothic, are answers that are shrouded in a haze of gray.

            Hawthorne presents several views into this lack of pronouncing judgment in both “Young Goodman Brown” and “The Minister’s Black Veil”.  The “communion in sin” of his characters is revealed in the reflections of themselves upon those around them.  In “Goodman Brown”, Faith is presumed the “innocent” as Goodman is the person the reader first sees as tempted and fallen.  As the story progresses the reality of Faith’s previous lapse in Christianity is revealed and the reader is forced to reevaluate the moral implications of his initial reaction.  Goodman reminds us that none of us ever truly knows a person in totality when he is forced to confront the truth of the moment, Faith is not faithful. 

            The reader again forms an opinion, about Mr. Hooper in “Black Veil”, that changes as the book “remains open”.  The use of additional reading and close reading bring to light the many levels, or layers, contained within the classical work.  These layers change the meaning as frequently as Hawthorne changes the visual perspective.  When viewing the veil, the reader makes assumptions that could be termed “popular” because they are surface level snap decisions.  Upon closer inspection the causes for Hooper donning the veil are seen from the standpoint of many people: the townspeople at church, the bride and groom, the corpse, and even Hooper’s own lost love.  Hooper can be viewed as hiding his sin from the world to protect him self from persecution or as hiding to protect others from his ungodliness.  Closer reading uncovers the view that perhaps Hooper is protecting himself from the sin of the world and trying to maintain his own Puritan ethic.  The truth is elusive and must be interpreted by each reader in a manner that fits his personal view of what is “right” for society.  

            Lincoln also leaves the reader or audience to decide their own version of what is morally correct by reminding them of their Christian standards and silently imploring the reader to weigh the sides of issues based on what is just and right.  Can the standard apply in one instance and not the other?  Can slavery exist beside a doctrine espousing freedom for all men?  The obvious answer is that the standards frequently deviate based on the truth and there is no standard or lasting truth.  The United States proved that injustice can exist in a “free” nation but that did not make the situation one that should be endorsed or tolerated. 

            Lincoln’s  “Address at the Dedication of the Gettysburg National Cemetery” exposes the “unfinished work” of promoting the “birth of freedom [. . .] of the people, by the people, for the people” as he silently asks the audience if this concept is in application.  In his “Second Inaugural Address”, Lincoln poses that both sides are at fault in a manner reminiscent of Hawthorne and his “no-one is without sin” doctrine.  A simple statement of “both could not be answered – that of neither has been answered fully” portrays the division of equity in a no win situation.  The Civil War remains an exquisite example of an evanescent truth viewed differently by different people. The actions of Lincoln, in pursuing the just cause of war, work in the classic writers tradition by using his actions and words, working simultaneously, to reach a higher level of meaning. 

            The pleasure a reader derives from this type of literature is as constantly changing as the truth.  Given different time periods and different issues addressed, the meaning can vary to suit the occasion while retaining the quality of morality as something to strive for.  Regardless of the “side” the person is on, he can see the issue from multiple views and weigh them effectively when this type literature teaches the concept of “changeable truths”.  While presenting a good story, as in Hawthorne, or an interesting speech, as in Lincoln, the pieces also have redeeming social value because they cause man to question his own integrity and place it up to scrutiny within his mind.  The realm of personal psychological evaluation adds a dimension to reading that cannot be found in popular works, though this is frequently found in representative literature that makes us address our views on regional issue or issues of culture that are foreign to our personal cultural dictates. 

            When teaching this type work in a classroom, the public must be considered.  The tax dollars contributed to public education come from diverse populations with many versions of culturally acceptable values and beliefs.  In using texts with morality issues, the teacher must remain open to all viewpoints and try to stay with fundamental values rather than the legality concepts that frequently drive decisions; a perfect example of this process would be “Billy Budd” by Herman Melville as the captain must decide how to pursue the murder sentencing.  Melville chooses to follow the dictates of society and consider the law as the definition of societies “right”; I personally would have considered the truth of the moment as a higher law.  In the classroom, the teacher must present all these sides or he is not doing the students a service.  To develop minds, there must be openness to alternatives not only in the literature but in the questions the literature raises.

These issues are the perfect mode to develop those questioning minds while allowing each student to find their own moral ground based on the many sides presented.

            The genre of classical literature is certainly not an easy one to read in a limited timeframe but it is one that should be used in the classroom because of the concepts it lets the reader “try on” given a “momentary truth”.  By leaving the decisions up to the reader the classical writer leaves the “book open” and provides opportunities for further exploration of symbols, values, and decision making ability. [VH]