Whitman and Emerson

     Walt Whitman reminded me a lot of Ralph Waldo Emerson.  While I don't know whether or not Emerson would necessarily approve of Whitman, there is a great deal of similarity between them.  Whitman really seems to embody Emerson's idea of seeing things differently, while at the same time bringing his own unique style to the idea.

     Emerson focuses a lot on the eye, and teaches the importance of being able to look at nature and really see it the way it is.  He wants people to absorb nature, instead of just looking at it and passing by.  He wants nature to evoke emotion, to create a feeling inside of a person that is inexpressable by words.  It is this kind of response that he talks about in Nature, saying that "The waving of the boughs in the storm, is new to me and old.  It takes me by surprise, and yet it is not unknown.  Its effect is like that of a higher thought or a better emotion coming over me, when I deemed I was thinking justly or doing right" (pg. 1284).

     

     Whitman follows Emerson's ideas, using very strong imagery and language to evoke a strong response from the reader: to get them to see things in an unusual or new light.  His work is totally unique in the way that it talks about familiar objects, and yet manages to portray them in such a way that it feels as if you are learning about it for the first time.  

          "Houses and rooms are full of perfumes, the shelves are crowded with perfumes,

          I breathe the fragrance myself and know it and like it,

          The distillation would intoxicate me also, but I shall not let it" (1873).

     What is a bit different between the two of them is the subject focus.  Emerson concentrates totally on nature, seeing it as the key to greater self-awareness and appreciation of the surroundings.  In contrast, Whitman focuses on people, implying that it is through his self-awareness that he is able to fully appreciate the beauty of nature and of other people around him.  He states that, "I exist as I am, that is enough/. . . One world is aware and by far the largest to me, and that is myself" (pg. 1885-1886).

     It is always fascinating to see different interpretations of an artist's work, and even though Whitman did follow Emerson's basic idea, it was interesting to see Whitman's views come through in his work and really make it his own.  

Works Cited

Perkins, George, and Barbara Perkins.  The American Tradition in Literature.  12th ed. Vol. 1. Boston.  McGraw-Hill, 2009. Print.

Douglass vs. Jacobs

     

Frederick Douglass and Harriet Jacobs were both escaped slaves who were encouraged to write down their stories to promote the abolitionist movement.  Both of their narratives showed the horrors that they had witnessed and experienced, and yet the stories are as different as they are alike.


     Frederick Douglass is still well renowned for his writings on his experiences in slavery, and he is by far the best writer - in terms of technique - of the slave authors we have read so far.  His style of writing and usage of language is extremely elegant, as much so or more than any educated person at the time.

     However, his story lacks the emotional depth of Harriet Jacobs.  Even though his writings portray the horrors of slavery very strongly, he retains a more factual approach to his narrative.  Douglass' style of writing seems to distance itself from the readers, remaining composed even while he describes the atrocities he witnessed.  He tells what happened, but he rarely, if ever, mentions the emotions that he felt when it happened. 

"he rushed at me with the fierceness of a tiger, tore off my clothes, and lashed me till he had worn out his switches, cutting me so savagely as to leave the marks visible for a long time after" (1773).

      Jacobs, on the other hand, uses a style of writing that is much more personal.  Although it is well written, it does not have the technical precision of Douglass' writing.  She writes much more freely, relying more on the story itself than on the writing.  She seems to speak directly to readers, telling not only what happened, but also showing the emotional impact it had on her.

"How long those hours seemed, and how fervently I prayed that God would not forsake me in this hour of utmost need!  I was about to risk every thing on the throw of a die; and if I failed, O what would become of me and my poor children?  They would be made to suffer for my fault" (1740).

      Although both of their narratives are extremely moving, Jacobs' narrative is much more emotionally powerful.  Of the two writers, Douglass is unquestionably better known, but if I had to choose between the two, I would have chosen to read Jacobs.

Works Cited

Perkins, George, and Barbara Perkins.  The American Tradition in Literature.  12th ed. Vol. 1. Boston.  McGraw-Hill, 2009.  Print.

Jacobs vs. Equiano

           Even though Olaudah Equiano and Harriet Jacobs were both slaves, their narratives are different in many ways.  While Equiano's story is still very emotional, the physical pain and torture that he went through can't compare with the sexual abuse that Jacobs had to endure for years.  Both of their stories are heartbreaking, but Jacobs' is more so, both because of what she went through and because she had no way to get out of it.  Unlike Equiano, Jacobs was unable to earn her freedom, and she was not even allowed to be bought by someone else.   

  

 

       

          The tone of the narratives is also a main difference.  Equiano's narrative comes across with the satisfaction of a self-made man.  His tone is one of triumph; he made it through all the challenges that he had to face, and he was successful in the end.  His story, in a way, details not so much the horrors of slavery as it does his own victory.

"the crew used to watch us very closely who were not chained down to the decks, lest we should     leap into the water; and I have seen some of these poor African prisoners most severely cut for attempting to do to, and hourly whipped for not eating.  This indeed was often the case with myself" (393).

 

          On the other hand, Jacobs' narrative comes across from a mother's viewpoint.  Jacobs details the horrors that she experienced and her fight to finally get away, but instead of portraying it as her own personal triumph, she credits her children as giving her the strength to succeed.  For "nothing less than the freedom of my children" (1740), Jacobs attempts what she could never do before: she runs away.  Thus her final triumph is not only her own, but also her whole family's.  

          Jacobs and Equiano were both skilled writers, and both of their stories are one of unimaginable horror, heartbreak, and finally, success.  However, I think that Jacobs' narrative is more powerful.  The ideas that Jacobs embodies - her love for her children, her strength, and her determination - appeal to the heart in a way that Equiano never could.     

Works Cited 
Perkins, George, and Barbara Perkins.  The American Tradition in Literature.  12th ed. Vol. 1. Boston.  McGraw-Hill, 2009.  Print.