LITR 4232 American Renaissance

LITR 4232 2006 final exam

Answers to Question 2 on Moral Complexity
in American Renaissance Literature

        In their works, classic writers such as Melville and Hawthorne show that morality wears many shades of gray and is not easy to judge. Instead of dictating the right and the wrong, they explore the truth “in a story as complicated as reality” (BP).

            In Hawthorne’s, Minister’s Black Veil, Mr. Hooper dons a veil to cover his face in shame, attempting to hide his secret sin. Because Hooper’s sin is never revealed, like his face behind the veil, the reader is prevented from tainting the text with their own moral absolute and relativist biases. I think if the sin was revealed, it would influence the reader in pronouncing a reductive and simple moral judgment. Perhaps this was the question Hawthorne was trying to explore – do we judge others without even knowing their sins? Perhaps the question is not whether their sins are right or wrong, but whether our judgments as a society in response to these actions are right or wrong. Thus, Hawthorne leads us to think and reconsider moral complexities which hide behind each man’s invisible veil, as multifaceted as the truth itself.

            Would it be easier to practice morality if we knew each man’s sins?  Brown, in Hawthorne’s Young Goodman Brown, becomes that seer who is able to peer into society’s most secret sins. This knowledge, however, only leads him to moral absolution, causing him to develop a judgmental attitude which hurts him most in the end. Hawthorne, now invites readers to consider the consequences of such harsh criticism, without thorough consideration. Also, he illustrates that we often find repulsive in others what we embody in ourselves. For instance, Brown, too, has been lured into the forest and heeded the call of the devil, but when others do the same, he is revolted. After his return from the forest, he shrinks from Old Deacon Gookin and Goody Cloyse as though from “the grasp of the fiend himself.”

            To examine moral issues, Hawthorne uses qualifiers or stylistic idiosyncrasy in his stories. By qualifying his statements of morality, he doesn’t judge, but rather presents his thoughts in a “dream-like state of which the reader has to concoct her own meaning” (lecture notes). By leaving the entire tale of Brown as an ambiguous question mark, he is leaving the reader accountable to figure out what happened to Brown in the forest. If everything that night was a dream, can we pronounce judgments on dreams – on illusions? In this case, then Brown, who thought he saw the sins of all had only seen a dream. How do we, then, be sure of what we see? Even when we see the sins of others, how do we know we aren’t seeing a mirage as Brown might have seen? Can we ever “see” the true sins of others or is the darkness merely caused by the veil which hangs before our eyes? Silently, Hawthorne urges readers to consider the consequences of moral extremes and whether it is really easier to stand on either side of the veil.

            Likewise, Melville’s Billy Budd also shows that no one can so harshly be held accountable for their actions and that morality has many sides. However Melville, unlike Hawthorne, presents at first what seems like stock characters to tantalize the readers to shape their own biases – by deeming Billy as the symbol of innocence and Claggart as that of dark evil. But, with progression of the story and unfolding of the characters, the reader is asked to reconsider her previous bias. Can the handsome Billy fall from innocence? Can the mysterious Claggart be a hero? The readers become the judges of these fateful characters’ morality and are led to explore the innocence of each.  Melville starts by providing a taste for every palate, an innocent “good guy” and a mysterious “bad guy,” but through the use of qualifiers, questions those very tastes of moral behavior.

In truth, if evil blinds us, so does innocence. Readers, knowing the complexities of human nature, cannot judge men as guilty or otherwise. Though Billy and Claggart appear to be “good” or “bad,” insight into their characters show more colors of gray than imaginable. By showing readers “the ragged edges” of “uncompromising truth,” classic writers challenge their readers to reconsider whether morality in individuals can have smooth edges.

The teacher who introduces such complicated works must be sensitive of the values and even individual biases of students. Teachers must understand that even though we cannot turn their heads from moralism to morality, we can by degrees shift our students’ gaze towards the truth.  [ND]

Human beings are forever finding themselves in moral dilemmas.  Virtually every decision we make is based on a set of moral values.  Some folks view life from a stance of moral absolutism.  They believe in absolute answers for everything, and are often viewed as rash or narrow-minded.  As discussed in class, another term for this type of value system is moralism.  This is a belief in a strict distinction between right and wrong.  “This value system is attractive in its simplicity, but dangerous in its vanity.  It presumes that the speaker is always right and those on the opposite side are always wrong.”

In contrast to moralism is the group of people who believe in moral relativism.  These are the individuals who view life from the opposite end of the spectrum.  Moral relativists view life with careless open-mindedness.  Individuals in this group appear to believe that “anything goes.”  In fact they are so carefree that they do not appear to take a stand for anything.  They are exemplary of the old cliché: “If you don’t stand for something, you’ll fall for anything.”

Of course, there are those who fall somewhere in between moral absolutism and moral relativism.  People in this category are said to have morality.  Morality, as defined in our class notes, is more of an exploratory concept of the borders between right and wrong rather than an absolute division between right and wrong.  This belief system permits a sharing of the responsibility and accountability.  It may be less immediately satisfying, but it is less prone to dangerous action and more inclined to humility than arrogance.  This is the area where the great classic writers like, Hawthorne, Whitman, Dickinson, and Melville reside, and on occasion, great leaders like Lincoln.  These are the people who “seem to recognize that human morality is both important and complicated” (exam question).

In his Gettysburg address, Abraham Lincoln exhibits his morality.  In the face of the Civil War, Lincoln was charged with addressing a group of American citizens to dedicate the Gettysburg National Cemetery.  He could have simply got up and told everyone that he believes in the freedom of the slaves, the north is right and the south is wrong, but Lincoln in his greatness, in his morality, knew that making such harsh judgments was not only wrong, it would cause disunity in the country.  Instead, Lincoln addressed the people as a “nation,” and he used operative pronouns such as “we” and “our” in effort to unite all the listeners whose “fathers brought forth on this continent, a new nation, conceived in Liberty, and dedicated to the proposition that all men are created equal.”  In his very brief speech, he praises the soldiers who gave their lives; “that from these honored dead we take increased devotion to that cause for which they gave the last full measure of devotion.”  Lincoln does not say which soldiers he is speaking of here.  He seems to be speaking of soldiers from both sides of the issue.  What is impressive is that he does not admonish one side or the other.  He manages to unite all of the people when he continues by stating that “we here highly resolve that these dead shall not have died in vain; that this nation, under God, shall have a new birth of freedom.”  He clearly states that the nation shall have freedom indicating his stand against slavery, but he does so in a manner that is non-condemning, non-arrogant.

Another example of Lincoln’s morality is in his Second Inaugural Address.  He found himself having to address the nation in the aftermath of the Civil War.  Certainly the tensions were tight between the north and the south, but once again, Lincoln handles the situation with class.  He draws both north and south into the same realm by explaining of the Civil War that “all dreaded it” and “all sought to avert it.”  He reminds the nation that “both (sides) read the same Bible, and pray to the same God” so both parties are privy to the moral law that states “judge not, that we be not judged.”  Lincoln continues to refer to the Bible and he weaves it in to his speech so that it is more his own voice, a divine providence, a moral backing, but not preaching.  His speech is more literary art with some Biblical reference as he sets the tone for the reconstruction; an era that would not be possible without a united nation.

While Lincoln was a great leader in morality, Emily Dickinson was a great classic writer of morality.  Many of her poems depict situations that make a statement, but somehow that statement can be interpreted in more than one way.  For example, in her poem, “Some keep the Sabbath,” Dickinson seems to take a stand on keeping her Sabbath in “an Orchard, for a Dome” rather than in a “church.”  She claims that while “some keep the Sabbath in Surplice,” she “just wear[s her] wings,” and listens as “God preaches.”  After all, he is “a noted Clergyman.”  Dickinson seems to be making an indictment on organized religion, but she does so in a way that is not preaching.  Her poem appears to be fair in that she is entitled to her belief, just as the reader is entitled to his, and rather than condemning the reader who believes in attending church, she simply conveys her beliefs without arrogance.  Like Lincoln, she appears to have some moral backing, but hers is also literary art.  Both Lincoln and Dickinson seem to speak with some ambiguity to “guard against simplistic or rash judgments on matters of consequential importance” (DG, 2003 Sample Answers).

Such discussions in morality are necessary to develop critical thinking skills, and would therefore be beneficial in studying complex moral issues in public schools.  The risk with such an endeavor involves recognizing that an individual’s morals are directly derived from one’s culture, so it is necessary to tread lightly so as not to appear arrogant or judgmental of others based on their beliefs.  However, there are rewards for learning to respect the beliefs of others, while learning how to non-judgmentally express your own.  The ability ingrained in one who exercises morality is an ability to view life from varying perspectives, and consequently, such ability enables an individual to deal with the countless moral issues encountered in life.  [JO’G]

As American society is changing in the 19^th century, the classic author, Hawthorne and the great leader, Lincoln, recognize that human morality is both important and complicated.  With moral absolutism, a strict distinction of right and wrong, as Dr. White suggests, it is attractive for simplicity, but dangerous in its vanity.  The speaker is always right and the other side is wrong.  With moral relativism, there is no accountability and a lack of unification in relation to others.  With morality, a concept that is between right and wrong, there is an element of humility and other regard ness.  

     At the start of the civil war in America, Lincoln’s purpose was to preserve the Union.  Through his Gettysburg Address and Second Inaugural Address, Lincoln refuses to place moral judgment of who is right or wrong. In Gettysburg, Lincoln uses “nation” five times in the address instead of “union”.  This indicates Lincoln’s unwillingness to condemn the South.  If he had used “Union”, then the South would seem to be excluded. 

     Also in Gettysburg, Lincoln further declines to place judgment on the South when he states, “The brave men, living and dead, who struggled here” (2079).  Lincoln could have been talking about Confederate as well as Union soldiers. 

     In Second Inaugural, Lincoln reaches to unify the nation as victory for the Union army is within sight.  By using inclusive word, such as “all”, “neither party”, “each”, “us”, and “both”, he brings morality to the situation.  By now, the ending of the civil war, feelings of bitterness, anger, and revenge prevail.  Lincoln, as a moral leader rises above it all sets the tone for his plan for the nation’s reconciliation and healing.

     “With malice toward none; with charity for all…let us strive on to finish…to bind up the nation’s wound; to care for him…his widow, and his orphan…cherish a just, and a lasting peace, among ourselves…”.  Lincoln realizes that by not passing judgment on the South, this is the only way towards preserving the Union and unifying the nation.

Hawthorne’s Young Goodman Brown portrays moral absolutism in Goodman and morality in his wife, Faith and the other townspeople.  Goodman sees his wife as pure and innocent, “Well; she’s a blessed angel on earth; and after this one night, I’ll cling to her skirts and follow her to Heaven” 

  When Goodman decides not to participate, he seems to do the right thing, however he saw his wife and other townspeople participate and was not willing to accept them.  “My Faith is gone!”  cried he, after one stupefied moment.  “There is no good on earth; and sin is but a name.  Come devil! for to thee is this world given.”    Everyone is guilty of sin, even Faith. 

     Hawthorne mixes light and dark colors to form shades of gray.  This is a new state of mind where no one is all good or all bad.  We see clearly the shade of gray with Faith’s pink ribbons.  Goodman idolized and presumed the townspeople pure, yet after that night he considers them all bad or evil.  He cannot accept Faith and the townspeople with their sinful nature.  In turn, he does not accept his own sinful nature.  For Goodman you are either good or evil and no in between.  However, Faith and the townspeople represent morality in that they accept that they struggle with sin and exercise humility when it comes to judging others. 

     Public schools are responsible to teach students how to study complex moral issues.  When faced with a moral issue, there are skills that can be taught to students to help them find the truth.  Questioning for more information and not just taking someone’s word for it can give students the advantage as they work through difficult moral issues.  [SB]