Author: Mackenzie Brown

Mackenzie Brown is a junior and a Co-Editor-in-Chief of the Gauger. This is her second year on the journalism staff. She is a staff writer and photographer for the Gauger and the school yearbook. She is also a member of the All-State Journalism staff and a State qualifier in Editorial Writing and Headline Writing.

Columbus Character Analysis – Research Paper

Mackenzie Brown on

October 17, 2016

Abstract:

This purpose of this essay is to use my research to identify whether Christopher Columbus was a bad man or the courageous hero that people thought him to be for years. Historians and scholars have debated for a long time about the good and bad qualities of Columbus and his accomplishments, and I used what I have learned to clarify the reasons why I believe that Columbus’ accomplishments are outweighed by his brutality as a leader.

_______________________

Clever but deceitful, skilled but greedy, Columbus had a complex character that left historians and scholars trying to determine whether Columbus was a good or bad man. It is believed that Columbus is thought of so highly because Americans needed a non-English leader to idolize after the American Revolution, but there are many debatable points about Columbus’ character. After much study, this researcher concludes that Columbus was more bad than good.

This conclusion was reached after examining lecture notes, classroom discussions, historical documents, and credible websites.

Even though Columbus was more bad than good, he did possess some good qualities, including his navigational skills and his courage to sail across the ocean into the unknown. He initiated colonization in the Americas by inspiring others to follow in his footsteps, which led to the America we know today. However, Columbus’ bravery and dedication are outweighed by his less admirable actions and characteristics.

Christopher Columbus was not a symbol of courage but one of invasion and genocide. For instance, Columbus was known to mistreat and dehumanize the natives of the continent he ‘discovered.’ When Columbus and his men first arrived in the Carribeans, the natives were peaceful and helpful to his people. He immediately saw this as an opportunity to take advantage of them rather than to start a fair and healthy alliance. Knowing the Indians were kind and ignorant about iron weapons, he recognized that they would make good slaves. Only a few months later, Columbus began calling them savages and cannibals in order to justify treating them as less than human. After his first trip back to Spain, he returned to the New World to find chaos. He took this opportunity to kill many of the Indians. It is believed that his men had raped and killed natives while he was absent, but if they were hesitant about their actions at all, they certainly had Columbus’ consent to mistreat the natives when he came back and was openly violent instead of attempting to recreate any semblance of peace. Columbus’ men were barbaric towards not only the male Indians they began enslaving but also the women, children and infants. Though most Native American deaths are attributed to the accidental spread of disease, Columbus’ violent ruling and mistreatment contributed greatly to their genocide. Due to common execution of natives without trial, the Spanish monarchs requested that Columbus be investigated. He was eventually brought back to Spain, and although it was one of his political rivals that brought charges upon Columbus, he blatantly admitted that many of the accusations. Along with this, his own early records, such as diaries and letters, prove that he never even set sail for science but to gain personal wealth by seizing it from others. Whether he found the trade route he desired or not, it was designed that wherever he landed he would steal wealth by any means necessary. Although the diseases brought from Europe were believed to have originated in Asia, the blame for the barbaric conquering of indigenous people rests solely on Columbus’ shoulders. Even after he was stripped of his title as governor, the policies he set endorsing slavery and extermination remained. The entire population of Taino Indians [1] were reduced from about 8 million to 3 million during Columbus’ regime, but in the years following his absence, the last 3 million natives were pronounced extinct, and not all of these deaths can be attributed to disease.

Columbus was not a brave leader but a greedy and stubborn man. During his first voyage, he told his crew that whoever spotted land first would be provided with a sizable amount of money as a reward from the Spanish monarchs. When a man pointed out the land from the ship he was on, everyone gathered and agreed that the cliffs in the distance were indeed land. Columbus was notified and he congratulated the crew, but he then claimed he had already seen lights from that direction the night before and only told a few people. This of course meant that he would get the reward instead of the man who pointed out the cliffs. This was one of the first signs of his greediness, aside from his intent behind his voyage of finding gold and stealing riches. He also knew that the people he conquered were undeserving. In fact, in one of his letters to Santangel, Columbus said, “they are artless and generous with what they have, to such a degree as no one would believe but him who had seen it. Of anything they have, if it be asked for, they never say no, but do rather invite the person to accept it, and show as much lovingness as though they would give their hearts.” Columbus to far too greedy to pass up an opportunity to conquer a naive group of people. Actually, this writing from Columbus was recorded after the Santa Maria wrecked and the Arawak natives came to the rescue [2]. He also described Indians as “so naive and so free with their possessions that no one who has not witnessed them would believe it.” Still, in a separate letter to King Ferdinand, he reported that he took possession of a large town and made friends with a nearby king who was no match for his men if the king ever became hostile. Despite his description of an amicable people, he eventually began allowing his men to rape, kill and enslave Indians. Of course, he could have been lying about the generous nature of the natives like he lied about the amount of gold and spices he found [4]. Regardless, he was an invader of their land and he lied about many things in attempt to save his reputation and his mission.

As if cruelty and greed were not enough, Columbus also participated in both slave trade and the destruction of culture. Between not actually discovering a trade route to India, the wreck of the Santa Maria [3], and not finding enough gold, Columbus knew he had to compensate for his failures if he was to come out of the situation wealthier and successful. His relationship with the Indians was peaceful once, but at some point his bravery shifted to brutality. Columbus took his harsh rule a step further, rounding up over five hundred Indians [5] and entering the market of slave trading. He knew that selling Indian slaves would provide him and his sponsors with a large sum of riches, so he went ahead with it even though the Indians were undeserving of such treatment. After selling the Indians as slaves, Columbus required the remaining natives to pay tribute in gold and punished them if they couldn’t find enough [6]. Although Columbus might not have invented slave trade, he certainly contributed and encouraged it by initiating African slave trade. About two hundred of the Tainos slaves died at sea, and when there weren’t enough Indians to meet demands of labor in Europe and the Caribbean, Africans became the cheapest and easiest to transport for slavery. Along with this, Columbus had had no religious tolerance, seeing as how he assumed Indians were heathens. He initially said “I believe that they would become Christians very easily, for it seemed to me that they had no religion.” Eventually, the Pope gave America to the Spanish, and Spain soon gave Indians an ultimatum, which was partially enforced by Columbus. This declaration warned that if Indians did not convert to Christianity, they would “take you and your wives and your children, and shall make slaves of them, and as such shall sell and dispose of them as their Highnesses may command; and we shall take away your goods, and shall do all the harm and damage that we can.” Columbus participated in both religious intolerance and slave trade, which both contrast the freedoms that Americans are proud of today.

Columbus is only one of many historical figures who have been scrutinized for their major role in the development of our nation and the New World. His accomplishments include the advancement of European knowledge of the world, which led to colonization, and the advancement of his navigational skills and bravery, which encouraged others to follow in his footsteps. However, his brutality and greediness led him to do unspeakable things in order to reach his goals. Columbus mistreated and dehumanized Native Americans, revealed himself to be a greedy and stubborn governor, and took part in slave trade and the destruction of Native American culture.

 

Footnotes:

  1. Tainos Indians were a subgroup of the Arawakan Indians.
  2. Arawaks lived in Hispaniola, which is presently divided into the Republic of Haiti and the Dominican Republic.
  3. The ship hasn’t been found yet, but it was recorded that the Santa Maria wrecked off the coast of present-day Haiti, and the Arawak Indians living nearby assisted in the recovery of many crew members.
  4. When Columbus reported the findings to Queen Isabella and King Ferdinand of Spain, he usually exaggerated about the lack of Indian resistance and the amount of gold found.
  5. The number of Arawaks that Columbus sent to Spain varies by source. Some sources claim that Columbus sent at least one thousand Tainos Indians as slaves while others say it was five hundred.
  6. Records state that many of the Indians that could not turn in enough gold were punished by removal of hands, arms, or legs.

 

Bibliography:

Churchill, Ward. “Columbus’ History of Genocide.” Massachusetts Institute of Technology. Indians Are Us, 1994. Web. 15 Oct. 2016.

Columbus, Christopher. “Letter to King Ferdinand of Spain.” University of Virginia, n.d. Web. 15 Oct. 2016.

McCormack, Owen. “Columbus Was a Mass Killer and Father of the Slave Trade.” IrishCentral. IrishCentral LLC, 10 Oct. 2014. Web. 7 Oct. 2016.

Morgan, Edmund S. “Columbus’ Confusion About the New World.” Smithsonian Magazine. Smithsonian, Oct. 2009. Web. 7 Oct. 2016.

Ojibwa. “Native American Netroots.” Native American Netroots. WordPress, May-June 2011. Web. 12 Oct. 2016.

Olson, Julius E., and Edward Gaylord Bourne. The Northmen, Columbus and Cabot, 985-1503: The Voyages of the Northmen. New York: C. Scribner’s Sons, 1906. Print.

Plous. “Christopher Columbus: The Untold Story.” Understanding Prejudice. Social Psychology Network, n.d. Web. 10 Oct. 2016.
“Slavery and Spanish Colonization.” Digital History. N.p., 2016. Web. 13 Oct. 2016.

“Our Town” – White Oak Comparison Essay

Mackenzie Brown on

October 3, 2016

People are drawn to stories and films by relatable anecdotes and themes. Everyone needs to feel a connection to the world, and the play Our Town by Thornton Wilder is well known for its familiarity. Anyone who lives in a small community can recognize subtle similarities as well as specific comparisons to their own lives. Although Our Town was set in a different time period, its people, their relationships and their goals are strikingly similar to those in White Oak.

The relationship between people and their community in Our Town reflects that of people in White Oak. For instance, Wilder’s Mrs. Gibbs is a representation of how a lot of people living in a small town feel about travel. Though she is content and she loves her community, she mentions that she wants to “go away someplace on a real trip” (p. 19) and she believes that “once in your life before you die you ought to see a country where they don’t talk in English and don’t even want to.” (p. 20) Like Mrs. Gibbs, people in White Oak want to break their routines every now and then to see the world. High school students are always itching to get away for at least four years, even if they don’t leave the country or even the state. Adults save their money and vacation days in hopes of taking a trip. Everyone needs a break from the monotony of day-to-day life, and people living in small towns know this feeling well. Along with this, the relationship Wilder portrays between Emily, George, and their engagement is similar to the way students feel about leaving White Oak for college. To get married in Grover’s Corner meant to leave home and grow up, which is exactly what going to college means for kids in White Oak. It’s a new experience that people look forward to but are nervous about as well. Emily and George both panic just before their wedding, and afterwards George says to his mother, “Emily and I are coming over for dinner every Thursday night.” (p. 74) He is reassuring his mother that he’ll still come around, like kids do when they leave their families for college. Each situation is bittersweet because Emily, George, and the students leaving White Oak have all been prepared and are looking forward to growing up, but change is difficult nonetheless. This is especially true if it means leaving behind small-town life.

Also, the majority of the people in Grover’s Corners have similar values and ambitions, as do the people in White Oak. For example, most of the students in White Oak have goals for their future, whether they plan to attend college or find a job. In Our Town, Emily plans to incorporate speaking into her future. After making a speech at school, she tells her mother, “I’m going to make speeches all my life.” (p. 30) And although he ended up changing his plans in order to marry Emily and become a farmer sooner, George once had ambitions to “be a farmer on Uncle Luke’s farm” (p. 36) only after attending an agricultural college. People who grow up in small towns often want to do big things with their lives, and like George and Emily, this sometimes means changing their plans. Along with this, the majority of the people in White Oak also have similar values, which can be seen in political views and religion, since many people here are Republican and there are a lot of churches for such a small town. In Grover’s Corners, Mr. Webb says that the citizens are “eighty-six percent Republicans; six percent Democrats; four percent Socialists; rest, indifferent” and “eighty-five percent Protestants, twelve percent Catholics; rest, indifferent.” (p. 23) This information portrays that most of the people of Grover’s Corners have the same values and beliefs, like those in White Oak.

Thornton Wilder’s Our Town has many similarities, allowing people to relate to small town life. Although the places and situations in Our Town are like those in White Oak, the comparisons between the people in the towns are the most notable. Grover’s Corners is similar to White Oak regarding its citizens’ relationships, goals, and values.

“Letters from an American Farmer” References the American Dream

Mackenzie Brown on

October 12, 2016

Michel-Guillaume Jean de Crevecoeur’s epistle called Letters from an American Farmer represents the principles of the American dream. When written, the letters reached out to Europeans looking to take control of their lives and make it better for themselves and their families. The three main tenets of the American dream that de Crevecoeur references are possibilities of self-reliance, the opportunity of the ‘promised land,’ and the American birthright to make one’s life better and better.

At this point in time, most Europeans were working on land that they didn’t own and paying rent with money, labor, and a percent of their harvest. This is why the promise of self-reliance and success in America was so attractive to potential immigrants. Even if these people would be required to leave behind family and work hard to maintain their land, it would mean greater success and freedom than they had ever experienced before. When they brought in the rewards from their hard work, they could keep it for themselves and build a comfortable life instead of paying a landowner. De Crevecoeur believed that in America, “the rewards of his industry follow with equal steps the progress of his labor; his labor is founded on the basis of nature, self-interest.” This portrayed to his audience that as long as American immigrants were diligent and hard-working, personal success would follow. He also describes an American as a man who “has passed the toils of a very different nature, rewarded by ample subsistence- This is an American.” De Crevecoeur knows that to attract immigrants he must let everyone know that in America, their hard work can be rewarded.

The picture of America as a ‘promised land’ was also appealing to many people. Most of the Europeans working under a landowner had probably never left their country or even town before, so it would have been a scary notion to pick up and leave it all behind. However, de Crevecoeur questions whether these places can truly be called home when he writes “Can a wretch who wanders about, who works and starves… Can that man call England or any other kingdom his country? A country that has no bread for him, whose fields procured him no harvest, who met with nothing but the but the frowns of the rich, the severity of the laws, with jails and punishments…” De Crevecoeur goes on to explain that America will provide for people like no other country can, and that America is a place that can truly be called home.

Another tenant of the American dream that de Crevecoeur emphasized was optimism and the potential for life to continuously improve. He believed that every American had a birthright to progress, and he writes that Americans “receive ample rewards for their labors; these accumulated rewards procure them lands; those lands confer on them the title of freemen, and to that title every benefit is affixed which men can possibly acquire.” Unlike the countries that immigrants leave behind, America provides its citizens with the privilege to be optimistic, safe, and successful. In America, emigrants could become citizens with a country to call their own. According to de Crevecoeur, “Individuals of all nations are melted into a new race of men, whose labors and posterity will one day cause great changes in the world.” Americans could not only be optimistic about personal growth but the success of their new home.

De Crevecoeur knew that emigrants needed to see America as a ray of hope. In his epistle, he addressed the topics we now know as the American Dream. Optimism, self-reliance, and living in a “promised land” were all tenants of de Crevecoeur’s reality rather than his dream. It is not surprising that he wanted to share the American life with anyone else who needed a new start.

Lamb to the Slaughter Compare and Contrast Essay

Mackenzie Brown on

Short stories and film adaptations are typically known for their wild differences and adjusted story lines. However, Roald Dahl’s short story “Lamb to the Slaughter” and Alfred Hitchcock’s film version have subtle differences that compliment the similarities. The film is suspenseful compared to the short story’s direct progression, Patrick is depicted as more of an antagonist in the film, and Mary’s motives for covering up the murder are more understandable in the text.

Alfred Hitchcock’s film adaptation of “Lamb to the Slaughter” differs from the text through an adjustment of the progression, an intriguing depiction of Patrick’s character, and a lack of sympathy for Mary and her motives. Hitchcock’s version contrasts the directness of the short story by slowing down the progression with the addition of suspense and dialogue. In order to do this, he has Mary talk through her denial after Patrick speaks of leaving her, saying “You can’t go… Patrick, I won’t let you!” This integration of dialogue with a few well-placed silences leads the viewer to suspect Mary’s intentions long before she kills Patrick. Hitchcock also presents Patrick in a way that makes him seem like the antagonist everyone wishes for- an insensitive and harsh villain. Unlike Dahl, Hitchcock reveals to the viewers that Patrick hasn’t been loyal to his wife or his marriage through a conversation between two detectives, one saying that Patrick “used to fool around a bit now and again.” Patrick is also very cold and condescending to Mary in the way he speaks to her. Though Hitchcock portrays Patrick as a stereotypical antagonist, he does not try to make Mary into a relatable or heroic protagonist. In contrast to Mary’s quiet giggle at the end of the short story, Hitchcock’s ending shows Mary smiling and giggling maniacally. He also closes the film by telling the viewers that Mary attempted to kill her husband “the same way,” with uncooked meat. This diminishes any sympathy the viewers might’ve had for Mary. After this it is hard to imagine that Mary’s motives could include anything other than self-interest. It opens us up to the idea that she might have planned out every step towards covering up Patrick’s murder before the night it took place. The film differs from the short story in progression, character depiction, and how self-absorbed Mary’s motives appear.

In Roald Dahl’s original short story, the plot’s progression is more direct, Patrick is less insensitive, and Mary’s motives for covering up her crime are somewhat understandable. Rather than drawing out the storyline with suspense, tension, and dialogue, Dahl follows the plot directly with cadence. For the most part, Dahl skips dialogue and narrates in paragraph form: “Jack Noonan asked if she wouldn’t rather go somewhere else… No, she said. She didn’t feel like she could move even a yard at the moment.” This portrays Mary’s true shock at the situation by showing that the night’s events are unraveling quickly and overwhelmingly, but it is also direct, avoiding lengthy dialogue or rigid suspense. Along with this, Dahl presents Patrick as direct but sensitive. For instance, Patrick never bothered to sit down for his talk with Mary in the film, but in the text he was patient. He sat and “kept his head down so that the light from the lamp beside him fell across the upper side of his face… She noticed there was a little muscle moving near the corner of his left eye.” Patrick’s body language reveals that he feels anxious, and perhaps even remorseful. This encourages the reader to feel sympathy for him, despite his unfaithfulness.  Dahl also portrays Mary’s thoughts in a way that allows us to feel sympathy for her at times.  It stands out to the reader that Mary considers her baby’s future rather than her own after she kills Patrick: “She knew quite well what the penalty would be. That was fine… It would be a relief. On the other hand, what about the child? What were the laws about murderers with unborn children?… Mary Maloney didn’t know. And she certainly wasn’t prepared to take the chance.” Despite her motives for killing Patrick, this clarifies that her motives for covering up the murder were maternal. Ultimately, she lies to protect her child. Roald Dahl’s short story differs from the film in its direct progression, Dahl’s depiction of Patrick, and Mary’s unveiled motives for covering up the murder.

There are several details that could be acknowledged as contrasting points between Roald Dahl’s short story “Lamb to the Slaughter” and Alfred Hitchcock’s film interpretation. However, it is the progression, depiction of Patrick’s personality, and Mary’s motives that are the largest and most subtle differences.

Criminology in Relation to Sociology Research Paper

Mackenzie Brown on

Law enforcement relies on the science of criminology because the job is used to study crimes and criminals in order to prevent crime. Rather than studying data alone, criminologists rely on sociology to analyze society and its effect on criminals. There are varied theories about why people commit crimes, and all of these theories are based on the criminal’s thought process before, during, and after the crime. Similarly, sociologists study the social nature of individuals and groups of people, which is largely based on the thought processes of people that are in and related to society. The study of sociology focuses on the relationship between an individual and the society that he or she contributes to. Therefore, by studying this relationship, sociologists can determine the ways that society impacts the thoughts and actions of the individual. Criminologists utilize these same kinds of studies when they depend on sociology to study criminals and crimes. For instance, psychologist Hans Eysenck combined sociology, criminology, and his observations as a psychologist to come up with the frequently-used terms introvert and extrovert. Similarly modern-day criminology is a branch of sociology because it relies on factors such as psychology and consequence while relating to criminal justice and crime prevention.

All sciences must draw from other sciences, and criminology is considered an interdisciplinary science, meaning that it relates to other branches of science. Criminology relies on psychology regarding theories and everyday tasks, although this association is not to be confused with forensic psychology, which is a completely different application of similar studies. The study of criminology is founded on a few basic theories that depend on psychology for verification. According to “Criminology Theories: The Varied Reasons Why People Commit Crimes,” one of the commonly accepted theories about why people commit crimes is the ‘Conflict Theory.’ This theory states that crime is sometimes commited because of conflicts found in society, which are typically between different social classes or groups, and it also states that laws are only necessary because of these crimes (“Criminology Theories: The Varied Reasons Why People Commit Crimes”). Along with this, a person’s reason for crime can be categorized using the ‘Choice Theory.’ “Criminology Theories: The Varied Reasons Why People Commit Crimes” explains that this theory uses psychology to dissect a person’s reasoning and determine that the person will weigh the benefits against the possible outcomes and decide whether or not the punishment is worth the crime. The ‘Conflict Theory’ and the ‘Choice Theory’ along with other criminology theories that relate directly to sociology, were established because of psychological observations made about individuals and groups in their specific society and culture. The application of psychology studies was necessary when forming these theories, and therefore psychology is related to criminology. Criminologists also rely on psychology concepts to learn the basics of criminology and to examine the minds of criminals (Schmidl). According to Schmidl, “There is hardly any textbook on criminology or any more or less comprehensive book on its subject that lacks some references to psychology,” and “There had been little contact between criminological thinking and psychology until psychologists started to deal with the computation of ’mental age’ and of the I.Q. of delinquents and criminals.” Criminology depends on psychology as it is an interdisciplinary science, and criminologists utilize psychology to learn more about people who have committed crime or might commit crime in  the future. After studying people using psychology concepts, criminologists can use these skills to find patterns and correlations among criminals and prison inmates (Schmidl). According to Schmidl, these observations are used to prevent future crimes and reform criminals. Psychology and sociology both study people, therefore criminology is related to sociology through its reliance on psychology.

Sociology and criminology are mutually relevant in the way that both studies regard deviance. In sociology, labels are placed on social groups and sociologists use these labels to find patterns related to the background and lifestyle of the people who act in conformity versus those who act in deviance. Deviance, according to Merriam-Webster Dictionary, is a state of difference compared to socially accepted standards. “Deviance in Sociology: Definition, Theories & Examples” explains that from the point of view of a sociologist, deviance can be seen as either positive or negative. This means that sociologists and criminologists search for patterns among social groups, whether the deviance is a crime or some other positive action that can promote or instigate social change. In the same way that crime is deviant from usual day-to-day behavior, patriotism following an event like the attack on the Twin Towers in September of 2001 is also deviant from typical behavior “Deviance in Sociology: Definition, Theories & Examples” states that “deviance, like conformity, is shaped by society.” Another theory that criminologists use to explain the origin of crime is the “Classical Theory.” According to “Criminology Theories: The Varied Reasons Why People Commit Crimes,” this theory offers the idea that a person commits crime because it is advantageous to them, even when they understand that they will face punishment if caught. This theory is derived from what John Locke believed, which is that all citizens choose to be governed by an unwritten contract based on a mutual need for the citizens to be protected and for the government to be supported (“Criminology Theories: The Varied Reasons Why People Commit Crimes”). This theory is widely accepted to be true, and for it to be accurate, it means that individuals choose to be deviant and commit crime. Sociology studies deviance in order to find patterns in society, and criminologist study deviance in order to further understand crime and criminals.

Criminology is related to sociology because of its dependence on psychology and its association with patterns and deviance. Although it branches off of sociology as a social science, criminology is actually an interdisciplinary science because it involves so many areas of knowledge and study. I originally believed that sociology related more to psychology and the study of individuals, but it is more closely to sociology and the study of groups and individuals in society and different cultures.

 

Works Cited

 

“Criminology Theories: The Varied Reasons Why People Commit Crimes.” Web log post.

    Udemy Blog. 22 Apr. 2014. Web. 2 May 2016.

    <https://blog.udemy.com/criminology-theories/>.

 

“Definition of Deviance.” Merriam-Webster. Merriam-Webster. Web. 08 May 2016.

    <http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/deviance>.

 

“Deviance in Sociology: Definition, Theories & Examples.” Study.com. N.p., n.d. Web. 5 May

    <http://study.com/academy/lesson/deviance-in-sociology-definition-theories-examples.html>.

 

Heffner, Christopher L., Dr. “Hans Eysenck.” Hans Eysenck Biography. AllPsych. Web. 29 Apr.

  1. <http://www.goodtherapy.org/famous-psychologists/hans-eysenck.html>.

 

Schmidl, Fritz. “Psychological and Psychiatric Concepts in Criminology.” Journal of Criminal

    Law and Criminology 3rd ser. 37.1: 37-48. Web. 3 May 2016.

<http://scholarlycommons.law.northwestern.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=3372&context=jclc>.

The Unknown Citizen & Richard Cory

Mackenzie Brown on

In “Richard Cory” and “the Unknown Citizen,” the subjects of the poems are perceived through public view in a way that differs from their true internal state of being. “Richard Cory” follows a wealthy man through the streets. Cory is perceived by the townspeople as royalty, but he later commits suicide, despite his idealistic and successful life. Similarly, Auden’s Unknown Citizen has a has a fittingly unacknowledged death after living a life of conformity that appears to be perfectly normal and organized. The importance of appearance and reputation is challenged by the lives and deaths of Richard Cory and the Unknown Citizen through their seclusion and lack of meaningful relationships, their idealistic status held together by conformity, and the outcomes of their supposedly perfect lives.

Both poems challenge the importance of reputation brought their apparent lack of meaningful relationships. In Robinson’s poem, the persona makes it clear to the reader that most citizens view Richard Cory as imperial, despite that “he was quietly arrayed” and “he was always human when he talked.” Cory avoiding drawing such attention to himself through his words or actions, and Richard Cory clearly lacked something important in his life, yet the citizens seem to both love and envy him. What Richard Cory lacked was a healthy and meaningful relationship with the people around him, which would have been more beneficial to his happiness than any amount of gawking. Similarly, the Unknown Citizen lacked anything more than insignificant, expected relationships. He had the appropriate number of friends. “was popular with his mates and liked a drink,” and “was married and added five children to the population… the right number for a parent of his generation.” However, no data or statistics about the man could have truthfully determined if his friends really cared about his happiness and well-being. Both men would have benefited more from having a few meaningful, passionate friends than they did from letting everyone believe that their lives were perfect.

Richard Cory and the Unknown Citizen both held ideal statuses that were held together by conscious conformity. The idolization of their lives by others challenges the idea that keeping up with society’s definition of success is healthy. In “the Unknown Citizen,” the man purposefully conformed to his community’s standards of success and happiness. The Bureau of Statistics believes that “in the modern sense of an old-fashioned word, he was a saint.” Any other citizen surely would have loved to live the life that the Unknown Citizen did. Every statistic said he should be satisfied, but the poet mocks this idea through the naivete of his persona. Likewise, Richard Cory seemed to have what was an ideal life in other citizens’ perspectives: “He was rich- Yes, richer than a king… In fine, we thought that he was everything… To make us wish that we were in his place.” In reality, he only conformed to the standards of the highest levels of success. He had wealth, but people need more than materials for happiness. Similar to the Unknown Citizen, this might have occurred to the others if they would have considered to him to be real person rather than a god. The Unknown Citizen’s reputation and Richard Cory’s social rank led to idolization, but neither of the two were truly happy, which challenges the idea that appearance is important.

The outcomes of their supposedly perfect lives is the most ironic challenger of the importance of appearance. Richard Cory “went home and put a bullet through his head,” and the Unknown Citizen’s death made his life anonymous. No one remembers anything about him except that he had a pristine record. According to citizens and statistics, each man was said to lead an ideal life of success. But despite their perfect lifestyles, they each died either in anonymity or from suicide. The wealthy man that everyone envied was not truly happy, and the ‘perfect’ citizen will go unremembered.

The idea that appearances and reputation are important is challenged by the deaths of Richard Cory and the Unknown Citizen through their lack of meaningful relationships, their idealized lives of conformity, and the outcomes of their supposedly perfect lives. No statistics, data, or opinions can truly determine a person’s happiness, success, or worth. Even though a person may appear to have a perfectly normal and organized life, they could have a perfectly normal and organized life, they do have personal situations that no one else knows about. Everyone has issues that they must deal with, and truthfully, the most important aspect of life is not a lucrative job or a normal social life. What every person needs is another person’s support.

The Importance of Learning to Read

Mackenzie Brown on

His calloused hands sting with each flip of a page. Threats of lashings hang over his head, weighing down his thoughts. Still, African American slave Frederick Douglass continues his task of learning how to read. With each letter learned, his vision clears, his mind grows more intuitive, and his perspective develops. Like Douglass, learning to read and taking advantage of this ability breaks our chains of monotonous thinking. Learning to read and developing this skill polishes our understanding of communication and enables us to form our own thoughts and opinions.

By learning to read, people also develop a better understanding of language and communication. For instance, in developing countries across the globe, illiteracy is linked to poverty. While learning to read couldn’t single-handedly fix economies or stop wars, having a basic education provides citizens with the ability to communicate and analyze, which is a strong foundation for improvement. Illiteracy creates instability, especially when nations fall behind regarding technological forms of communication, but learning to read opens the mind and leads to innovation. Developing the ability to read furthers our understanding of communication, which is a starting point to further understand people and social habits.

The ability to read also assists people in analyzing situations and forming opinions. Rather than accepting what everything peers, leaders, and the media believe, a person can analyze a situation. For example, a gym-hating hypochondriac who sees an advertisement about the newest, fastest, and cheapest way to lose weight might initially fall victim to the ad’s propaganda techniques. However, when he decides to research the product, he finds that it has a reputation for its unhealthy side effects. Instead of thinking in a conformed manner, we can all remain open-minded and recognize instances in which there are many different perspectives. Along with this, reading requires one to form images of characters on personality rather than physical appearances. When a young child with a growing mind visits the library, a book won’t supply her with much information about the characters’ appearances. For the most part, she is provided with their decisions and actions. She develops the habit of forming opinions about peers and elders based off of their personality, which is uncommon yet necessary in our society. Learning to read teaches us to think for ourselves and form individual opinions.

Through learning to read, Douglass was able to discover the injustices of slavery, and more importantly, that this oppression was so massive and atrocious that he’d been taught to think slavery was normal and acceptable. Learning to read gives people the opportunity to better understand communication and to leave behind monotonous or conformed thinking.

“Night” Critical Essay- Syntax Comparison

Mackenzie Brown on

     In the Holocaust memoir Night, Elie Wiesel communicates the horrors of his journey from Sighet as an innocent, passionate child to his time spent at the Auschwitz concentration camps facing a harsh reality. Through the use of diction and syntax, Wiesel emphasizes the deterioration of the Jewish prisoners’ emotional and physical conditions.

     Within the first five chapters, Wiesel utilizes terminology to present the Jewish background of Sighet, as well as his own passion towards worship. For example, Wiesel has a strong determination to “…find in Sighet a master to teach [Wiesel] the Zohar, the Kabbalistic works, the secrets of Jewish mysticism.” (5) This terminology is used by Wiesel to show his strong dedication as a Cabbala student. Later on in the first five chapters, Wiesel employs despair-filled diction in a way that shows his growing mental exhaustion: “My head was spinning: You are too skinny… You are too weak… You are too skinny.” (72) Through this hopeless diction, we can infer that the camps are already taking a toll on both his physical and emotional health. However, during his 42-mile trek in chapters six through nine, Wiesel and the Jews are pushed to the breaking point: “The idea of dying, of ceasing to be, began to fascinate me.” (86) Wiesel’s choice of morbid diction regarding this experience exhibits the level of endurance the Jewish prisoners needed in order to survive the breaking down of their stamina and perseverance. Throughout his memoir, Wiesel’s transformation of diction from devout terminology to desperation portrays the gradual shift of the prisoners’ conditions from strong and content to weak and hopeless.

     Wiesel also uses rhetorical questions and juxtaposition to illustrate the worsening of the prisoners’ emotional and physical conditions through rhetorical questions. While in Buna, Elie and the other prisoners are sent into blocks when the sirens go off one day. They can see two unguarded cauldrons of soup, but they fear being shot if they leave the barracks: “Two lambs without a shepherd, free for the taking. But who would dare? Fear was greater than hunger.” (59) Through this rhetorical question, Wiesel shows that the fear of being shot overshadowed the hunger of most prisoners, and few were desperate enough to risk their lives for soup. In contrast, many prisoners were actually tempted with death on the trek  to Gleiwitz in chapters six through nine: “Get up? How could I? How could I leave this warm blanket? I was hearing my father’s words, but their meaning escaped me..” (88) Wiesel utilizes rhetorical questioning in these last chapters to emphasize that he was so exhausted the snow seemed like a warm blanket to him. His questioning represents the complete and hopeless exhaustion that all of the prisoners feltl. Though the Jews had once been fighting for their lives, death now seems a merciful option over their present suffering.

     Another way Wiesel reveals changes in the prisoners regarding syntax is through juxtaposition. For example, when the Jews are being forced out of Sighet in chapters one through five, the guards are able to use the Jews’ kind hearts against them: “One person was placed in charge of every (cattle) car: If someone managed to escape, that person would be shot… They (the Gestapo officers)… were all smiles; all things considered, it had gone very smoothly.” (22) This use of juxtaposition places the threat of death beside peace and satisfaction in a way that portrays the Jews’ will to protect each other by not attempting escape. However, after Wiesel has been in concentration camps for a long time, he witnesses a man beating his own father for bread before being killed by other Jews for the same bread: “ There were two dead bodies next to me, a father and the son.” (102) Soon after this, Wiesel’s father saves him from being strangled. Wiesels’ use of juxtaposition here shows us that the Holocaust has changed many people to a desperate every-man-for himself mindset, although Wiesel and his father were able to resist this.

     Through diction and syntax, Wiesel was able to emphasize the changes Jewish prisoners went through during the Holocaust. Many became physically worn out and emotionally drained. Eventually, their lives became about survival, and seemingly nothing more.