LITR 4232 American Renaissance LITR 4232 2004 final exam

LITR 4232 American Renaissance

LITR 4232 2004 final exam
Sample Answers to Question 2
on Moral Complexity

When faced with a moral issue in life, many people oversimplify the issue by either proclaiming something as totally wrong or that nothing at all is wrong with it. However, the divisiveness between the two decisions only point to the complexity of the issue, no to the truth of it. In reality, the truth behind moral issues is not as simple as right and wrong. Classical writers such as Hawthorne and even great leaders such as Lincoln portray moral issues in a more complex light. In Hawthorne’s case he does not dictate what is right and wrong, instead he explores the truth of the subject in a story as complicated as reality is, causing readers to think about these issues and come up with their own decision. In Lincoln’s case in many of his speeches he does not condemn any one side. Instead, he speaks of the subject in terms that elevate the listeners above their difference to unite the country and a single unifying truth.

In a Minister’s Black Veil Hawthorne explores the issue of sin, with a symbol of a veil that covers a minister’s face. Just as the truth in life is difficult to grasp, so to, is the exact meaning of the veil difficult to understand. The initial ideal conceived by the church is that a symbol of some hidden sin within his life. Indeed this ideal is validated, even by the minister who replies “and if I cover it for secret sin, what moral might not do the same?” Yet the meaning often changes; it turns into a “dismal shade” used to “separate' the minister from the world. It even changes to represent the minister’s sorrow. The purpose of continually changing the meaning of the veil is to keep the reader thinking of things it could represent, perhaps even in their own life. This thought process, by the reader, begins early on in the story as well. When we first meet the minister, the reader as well as the church has no ideal why the minister is wearing the veil. We are meant to ponder as the church does what the veil represents. So that through a story about a minister and his symbolic veil Hawthorne has creates a circumstance that causes the reader to ponder on the issues of sin in society. So that by the end of the story when the minister proclaims, “I look around me, and, lo! on every visage a Black Veil!” this is not merely a comment made to the church members but to us as readers as well.

Not only is the confusing nature of truth explored in his use of symbols but it can also be seen in the characters themselves. This is perhaps most apparent in the short story “Young Goodman Brown.” In this story we are place in a city where there are strict distinctions made between “chaste dames” and “women of spotted fame.” Yet they are all found to be seated together at the devil’s gathering. Even the church’s minister as well as Goodman’s old school teacher are not free from there evil ties with the devil. Being witness to this event is horrifying to Goodman. It was not the event so much that was horrific to Goodman, but that all his preconceived notions he had about what constituted being a good person versus being bad person got turned up side down. The effects of which, is a story that causes the reader to stop and question about ones own pretexts of what we believe to be right and wrong.

These techniques of causing a reader to come to their own conclusions are not only used by polished writers but even by great leaders as well. After the civil war Lincoln was face with the problem of reconciling the relationship of the North and the South. The country was separated by two different distinct opinions on the issue of slavery. Yet Lincoln did not condemn the south. Nor did he do the opposite and justify there actions. Instead he took the position of “let us judge not, that we be not judged.”

Instead of condemning the South or proclaiming the riotousness of the North, Lincoln instead focuses on the common ground between the two sides. In the Gettysburg address he relied on the fact that both sides lost men on this battle field. Lincoln would point to the “larger sense,” that there is a more important aspect that men died here and he pointed out the fact that their “full measure of devotion” should not die in vain. He makes this same argument in the Second Inaugural Address when he says God gave “both North and South this terrible war.” Lincoln takes no pleasure in winning the war and justifies no side as being ‘right’.

Yet this is not to say that Lincoln did not think he was right. Of course he believed he was right or else he would not have fought the war. Lincoln was merely steering clear from language that would sound too morally absolute. Such language would alienate his listeners and add great disunity to the nation. Instead Lincoln does not say he was right, he merely puts faith in God that the best outcome for the nation was fulfilled. He said the slaves should have been freed not because he said so, but because it was apart of the “providence of God.” Lincoln says about slavery “He now wills to remove.” God wishes it gone, not Lincoln, not the North, but it is meant to be. Lincoln uses this rhetoric in order not to alienate the South. Instead, it simply uses the common ground of Christianity to bring the issue to a conclusion.

One of Lincoln’s concluding comments says much about this complexity of moral issues. Lincoln states, “With malice toward none; with charity for all; with firmness in the right, as God gives us to see the right…” Interestingly this phrase characterizes the two reactions often made to moral situations, moral relativism and moral absolutism. “With malice toward none” and “charity for all,” is not moral relativism per se, but it does appeal to the lack of judgment that moral relativism is fond of. Yet Lincoln does not fully leave judgment out, he continues with the “firmness in the right, as God gives us to see the right.” This comment is not fully moral absolutism either, but once again, it does address the issue that society does need to try to address what is “right” and what is “wrong.”

The complexity of Hawthorne and Lincoln’s understanding on the treatment of moral issues is amazing and there is much to be learned from them especially as future teachers ourselves. One of the students in a previous final, made the distinction that a teacher is often faced with the choices to teach the truth or obey the society’s expectations. I thought it very astute of the student to compare this issue with Melville’s Billy Budd, particularly how the captain was caught between two decisions. The captain could obey the constructs of society and the military’s ideals of rank and justice by executing Billy Budd or he could disregard the rigid constructs of society and let Billy Budd go on the pretext that he is only a kid (or what ever the truth happened to be).

This was a great comparison that would not have come to my mind with out having read this essay. The student would go on to say that in the Captain’s place, truth should be chosen before the precepts of society, but in a teacher’s place it is not that simple. I agree with his or her conclusion. Truth should always be favored and strived for when making internal and personal decisions, especially when that decision externally affects people around them, such as Billy Budd. However, when dealing with teaching what truth is, one would do better to learn from the masters, such as Hawthorne, Lincoln and Melville. To not dictate what the truth is but show new ways to explore it. After all these exceptional writers, I am sure, did not gain their great critical thinking abilities by blindly accepting everything their teachers told them.

Individuals are ultimately responsible for their own actions, which is why they should be free to make up their own decisions. Indeed the captain could have benefited with a few critical thinking lessons but it was listening to the dictates of others that got him in trouble in the first place. It was following too strictly to the codes of authority which put the captain in the situation where he must face his conscience, for the rest of his life, having killed a boy. [BP]

Some of the greatest writers of all time have addressed the social problems that arise from living in a moral society. The best writers find ways to make the moral decisions of their characters or subjects seem obvious until further character development is introduced. Two amazing writers who utilize the technique of character development in complicating the moral decision are Herman Melville and Nathaniel Hawthorne.

Herman Melville makes his introduction of characters in Billy Budd quite lengthy. Each character is given a strong personality that represents distinct traits in the human character. These characters are most unique in Melville’s style because they have attractive and repulsive attributes at the same time. This contradiction of each character makes them easy to identify with because it is almost considered human to be somewhat contradictory.

The first character that Melville introduces in a contradictory way is Billy Budd. He is described by Melville as having a “degree of intelligence going along with the unconventional rectitude of a sound human creature”. This description makes us think that Budd is stable and dependable. A few sentences later we see a strong contrast to Billy’s intelligence when Melville describes him as “in many respects …little more than a sort of upright barbarian”. Now our perception of Budd is more conflicting. He is able to be intelligent and brutish at the same time. Billy reminds us of someone who is innocent, yet ignorant at the same time, allowing him to have great faults later on in the story. . . . [JL]

When hearing the examples that describe moral absolution and moral relativism I think of two different types of people. When thinking of moral absolution, I envision my father who is a super conservative narrow minded person and when thinking of moral relativism I again think of my father only this time he is calling me a hippie because of my open mind and free thinking lifestyle. Finding a happy medium within our conversations of human morality seems to be the hardest time. Although young and with not much wisdom I realize that holding opinions only within each extreme is no way to live life. To become a well-rounded human being one must at least understand both sides of the coin and be open to any ideas and opinions to grow and learn. Human morality is an extremely touchy topic and if one is thinking with only an absolute or relative attitude he or she is missing the complete picture. For as long as good and evil prevails on earth there will be times when each standpoint is a better choice than the other. Finding the balance within you is the key to a well-rounded attitude.

Since I lean towards a relative attitude and Whitman, a fellow open thinker, supports this thinking I was interested in his poem, There was a Child Went Forth. Usually Whitman provides equality among humans within his poetry, yet in this poem definite gender roles are determined.

The mother at home quietly placing the dishes on the supper-table,

The mother with mild words, clean her cap and gown, a wholesome odor falling

off her person and clothes as she walks by,

The father, strong, self-sufficient, manly, mean, anger'd, unjust

These lines insinuate a definite role specifically designed for a female or a male. The world my father lived in recognizes these roles, but the world I grew up in fights these divisions. This is not a negative or degrading idea and these words are not wrong. However in this day and age roles are reversed and women and men can be equal, (even though many times they still are not.) Many people have strong memories of their mother in the kitchen and the sweet smell she always has. Many remember their father as the "man of the house," taking care of business. These thoughts from the relative standpoint do not set the women's movement back because mom is in the kitchen it is just a positive memory to realize how far people have come as deep thinkers. The pleasure and benefits that come from role definers is that now there are options and possibilities.

People cannot think one way because this leads to destruction. Lincoln represents this the best in his Second Inaugural Address:

Fondly do we hope- fervently do we pray- that this mighty scourge of war may speedily pass away. Yet, if God wills that it continue...

With malice toward none; with charity for all; with firmness in the right, as God gives us to see the right, let us strive on to finish the work we are in...

to do all which may achieve and cherish a just and lasting peace, among ourselves, and with all nations.

I believe this passage alone is how one answers the question to who is right and who is wrong. Lincoln obviously was anti-slavery yet realizes that what needs to happen needs to happen. He wants the war to end but states that if it must go on it must go on. Many may believe he was an absolute thinker but in these words he speaks openly and realizes that for greater good and peace among all the country may have to continue to fight. He is not saying the south is wrong or right he is not saying the north is innocent or guilty he is clearly speaking for all mankind by knowing a lasting peace must occur to live.

Studying these complex issues within public schools could be quite risky. The major benefit is that the young students will have the option to be more open minded and free thinking on their own instead of waiting until they are older to form their own identity. If young people can enter college with open minds they would definitely benefit more. Coming from a public school background, I realize now I was told what to think and what to believe because some high-ranking administrator wanted me to think the way he does. If students can learn at a young age to think for themselves this society would be more interesting. The important factor to remember if one is going into teaching is that as a teacher you cannot push your beliefs on your students. It may be hard to teach an idea that you disagree with but to disregard ideas and thoughts that are not of you liking is unfair to impressionable minds. Learning and understanding both sides of the issue is so important because that is what creates well rounded individuals that can grow up and teach the next generation of impressionable minds. If you learn anything in life I think that trying to find a balance of absolute and relative thinking should be it. [BN]