Blog Four

"Swing Low, Sweet Chariot," "Keep Your Hand on the Plow," and "Go Down, Moses" are all short songs that were sung by slaves to encourage hope during their slavery. They would sing these songs while they were working to gain hope for a better day.

"Swing Low, Sweet Chariot" has a few verses that really stick out to me:

"If you get there before I do,

Coming for to carry me home,
Tell all my friends I’m coming, too.
Coming for to carry me home."

These verses really show the hope that the slaves had. All they wanted to to was to go home. All of these short songs had the same message.

Emerson was very anti slavery. He said that "I think we must get rid of slavery or we must get rid of freedom.... If you put a chain around the neck of a slave, the other end fastens itself around your own" (Baym).

Thoreau was also against slavery. In his writing, "Civil Disobedience," he wrote that "They are the lovers of the law and order who observe the law when the government breaks it" (Thoreau.) He encouraged people to follow their moral compass instead of following the law (Wayne). I think that he was right in that aspect. The law is not always morally correct. Sometimes it is okay to break it if you are following your own personal beliefs.

Emerson, Thoreau, and these anonymous writers all believed that slavery was wrong. I think it was great how Emerson and Thoreau did not just follow what other people were doing, even though it was wrong. I think that they did the right thing by standing up for what they believed in. It is hard to stand up for something you believe in when everyone else seems to be against it, but these two men did. They stood up for slaves and helped expose the evil nature of slavery. They helped slavery by exposing these things and getting people to think out of the box instead of believing in whatever the government tells you to believe in.

Baym, Nina, Ronald Gottesman, Laurence Holland, Francis Murphy, Hershel Parker, William Pritchard, Norton Anthology of American Literature, Second Edition. W. W. Norton and Company, New York: 1986.

Thoreau, Henry David. "Thoreau's Civil Disobedience - 1." The Thoreau Reader. Web. 25 Jan. 2012.

Wayne, Tiffany K. "'Slavery in Massachusetts'." Encyclopedia of Transcendentalism. New York: Facts On File, Inc., 2006. Bloom's Literary Reference Online. Facts On File, Inc.

"Swing Low, Sweet Chariot." Glencoe Literature. Ed. Jeffrey Wilhelm. American Literature ed. Colombus: McGraw-Hill, 2010. 348. Print.

Blog Three

Walt Whitman's poem Calvary Crossing a Ford, Whitman writes about a metaphorical line that takes an long, metaphorical path. In Whitman's poem, he writes about soldiers (Huff). The speaker seems to be viewing the path at a distance. He can see them coming, but when they get to him he writes that "the guidon flags flutter gaily in the wind" (Whitman line 8).

Randall Huff analyzed this poem with the main subject being the calvary, which were the jet fighters of their day (Huff). The metaphorical line is really a line of soldiers and it is the soldiers that are embarking on this path. The scene is not dangerous, as you learn from the last line. Since the flags are "fluttering gaily," they are no threat (Huff). Ironically enough, this is men at war who are actually peaceful. I think that Whitman is a confusing poet sometimes, and this poem is definitely a confusing one. I would not think that men at war were at peace, but he writes as if these men are having relaxing walk fluttering their flags around (Oliver).

Walt Whitman's brother went to war when the Civil War began. He was wounded and then lived with Walt (Huff). I think that Whitman may have been against war after this since it hurt his brother, but he seemed to take more of an interest in it. He volunteered as a nurse and helped cure the injured. I guess he took the high road with his brother's injury.

Whitman more or less supports the war and the goals of it. He is optimistic about the results. He strongly believes in supporting the union at all costs (Oliver). He wants the war as a first priority in the North (Oliver).

Emerson was against slavery and was for women's rights (Emerson). His philosophy on war was very different than Whitman's.

Both authors want freedom and they want it badly. They also both use animals as metaphors (Emerson). They want freedom in different ways. Emerson wants more personal freedom and freedom from rules while Whitman wants freedom for his country, like Abraham Lincoln.

Whitman, Walt. "118. Cavalry Crossing a Ford. Whitman, Walt. 1900. Leaves of Grass."Bartleby.com: Great Books Online -- Quotes, Poems, Novels, Classics and Hundreds More

Huff, Randall. "'Cavalry Crossing a Ford'." The Facts On File Companion to American Poetry, vol. 1. New York: Facts On File, Inc., 2007.Bloom's Literary Reference Online. Facts On File, Inc.

Oliver, Charles M. "'Cavalry Crossing a Ford'." Critical Companion to Walt Whitman: A Literary Reference to His Life and Work, Critical Companion. New York: Facts On File, Inc., 2005. Bloom's Literary Reference Online. Facts On File, Inc.

"Emerson, Ralph Waldo." Library of Congress. Prints and Photographs Division. Bloom's Literary Reference Online. Facts On File, Inc.

Blog Two

The Gettysburg Address was a monumental speech given by Abraham Lincoln in 1863 (Barney). When he gave it, the audience seemed to be uninterested and Lincoln felt as if it was a failed speech. It was only after that people realized that this speech was one of the most compelling speeches (Barney).

Lincoln strongly believed in the philosophy of common sense (Kempf). Common sense is thinking constantly, consistently, logically, and should make life better in more ways than one (Kempf). I think that common sense is very important and I agree with his philosophy that everyone should have common sense.

Lincoln writes in "The Gettysburg Address" in a way that he eases in with common sense. He talks about things that you should be able to figure out yourself. For example, he wrote "We are met on a great battle-field of that war. We have come to dedicate a portion of that field, as a final resting place for those who here gave their lives that that nation might live. It is altogether fitting and proper that we should do this" (Lincoln). He then goes in to a deeper part of his speech starting with "but, in a larger sense..." (Lincoln).

Thoreau believed in common sense too. He believed in personal and spiritual growth (Barney). He did not agree that society should be focused on money and on the economic side of things (Barney). I think that they are alike that you have to have common sense to survive, but I think that Thoreau would wants a more simplier world where Lincoln wants a better world where people have common sense and get along. Thoreau is more anti things while Lincoln just wants to fix them.

In "The Gettysburg Address," Abraham Lincoln seems to talk about what we did in the past, what we have because of that, and what we have to do to make life better. In just three short paragraphs, he moves a nation.

Thoreau, Emerson, and Lincoln all wanted freedom> Thoreau and Emerson wanted freedom individually while Lincoln wanted freedom as a country. Lincoln looked at things as a group while Thoreau could sometimes be more personal with his philosophies.

Barney, Brett, and Lisa Paddock, eds. "Gettysburg Address."Encyclopedia of American Literature: The Age of Romanticism and Realism, 1816–1895, vol. 2, Revised Edition. New York: Facts On File, Inc., 2008. Bloom's Literary Reference Online. Facts On File, Inc.

Lincoln, Abraham. "The Gettysburg Address by Abraham Lincoln." NetINS Showcase. Web. 04 Feb. 2012.

Kempf, Edward. "Abraham Lincoln's Philosophy of Common Sense." Abraham Lincoln - Daguerreotype of Young Abraham Lincoln. Web. 04 Feb. 2012.

Blog One

Frederick Douglass was born into slavery in Maryland (Dorbolo). Jon Dorbolo describes Douglass as "a man possessed of exceptional intelligence and perception (Dorbolo). His philosophy is that he thinks slavery is horrible and he thinks it should be abolished. His writings show the horror of slavery.

Ralph Waldo Emerson believes that all things exist in a flowing way (Brewton). He strongly believes in self reliance and independence. He believes that originality is truly just a bunch of pieces of information from other sources coming together (Brewton). I think that that is true. Nothing is truly original these days. Everything is an idea from an idea from an idea. Being original is obsolete.

Both of these men believe in independence. They seem to both believe that along the journey of life, people should learn from experiences (Brewton). For example, in Frederick Douglass' work he writes "Would you have me argue that man is entitled to liberty? that he is the rightful owner of his own body?" (Douglass).

These men disagree on where this independence and soul searching should come from. Emerson believed that you should develop through your soul while Douglass thought you should develop through your mind (Dorbolo). For example, Douglass references the soul searching when he is talking about freedom and the fourth of july, "...I do not hesitate to declare, with all my soul.." (Douglass).

Emerson believed that you should do what you do for yourself and not for other people. He believed that no one should care about what other people think (Brewton). I think that Douglass did care what other people think because he wanted everyone to be against slavery. In his essay "The Meaning of July Fourth to the Negro," he talks about how against slavery he is. He tries to expose the horrible ethics of slavery. Even though his writing is dark, he ends on a bright note. Douglass wrote "No abuse, no outrage whether in taste, sport or avarice, can now hide itself from the all-pervading light" (Douglass). I think that Emerson could learn to look on the bright side like Douglass did. Emerson seemed to just hate on everything, while Douglass ended with two paragraphs of good that the world has done.

Dorbolo, Jon. "Great Philosophers: Frederick Douglass." Oregon State University. 2002. Web. 04 Feb. 2012.

Brewton, Vince. "Emerson, Ralph Waldo [Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy]." Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Web. 04 Feb. 2012

Douglass, Frederick. "Africans in America/Part 4/Frederick Douglass Speech." PBS: Public Broadcasting Service. Web. 04 Feb. 2012.

Reflection: Civil Disobedience

After reading Henry David Thoreau's essay "Civil Disobedience," I thought about breaking rules more in depth. I expected to strongly dislike reading this, but I actually quite enjoy his take on government. In section one, Thoreau wrote about the phrase " "That government is best which governs least" and what it means to him. Thoreau wrote about how this statement needs to be "acted up to be more rapidly and systematically" (Thoreau). He was basically saying that one day we could possibly have no need for a government and everyone would get by just fine. Following this statement, Thoreau wrote about how the American government is only a tradition loosing integrity. He compares the government to a wooden gun that people point at themselves (Thoreau). I found this comparison very interestingly put. He then writes, " But it is not the less necessary for this; for the people must have some complicated machinery or other, and hear its din, to satisfy that idea of government which they have. Governments show thus how successfully men can be imposed on, even impose on themselves, for their own advantage. It is excellent, we must all allow. Yet this government never of itself furthered any enterprise, but by the alacrity with which it got out of its way. It does not keep the country free. It does not settle the West. It does not educate" (Thoreau). In this passage, he is basically saying that people make the government up to be this huge, great thing, when really it is just pushing us toward what we want in life. The government tells you what to do and it tells you how to act, but it is you who actually does those things. I found this to be a very interesting spin.

This essay definitely belongs in the Romanticism and the Transcendentalism time period. Transcendentalism was a time of individual intuition as a means to understand reality (Quinn). God was still around, but he was found in nature. An individual's soul mirrors the world's soul and we can connect through nature (Quinn).

Thoreau, writing about his own view on the government, definitely went outside the box from the past time period. He jumped right into transcendentalism with his individuality.

Even though it sounds as if Thoreau does not want a government, he takes a turn and says he just wants a better government. Discussing a few problems that he has found, such as restrictions on trade, he proves himself to be a credible source. He also discusses the problem with laws. Making you think with points like "The only obligation which I have a right to assume is to do at any time what I think right. It is truly enough said that a corporation has no conscience; but a corporation of conscientious men is a corporation with a conscience. Law never made men a whit more just; and, by means of their respect for it, even the well-disposed are daily made the agents of injustice" (Thoreau) he makes you think about the difference between being morally right and being right based on the law. He gets you thinking about the question: Should you be right based on morals, or should you stand by the law?

Thoreau then gets into how to act towards the American government. He suggests avoiding association all together. I personally think that this is not the best possible thing. If you want government to change you can just not sit around and wait for someone else to change it. You have to do things like vote or protest. Reading further, I realize that Thoreau does encourage the act of rebellion. He says that is is not only a right, but it is also a duty (Thoreau).

Quinn, Edward. "Transcendentalism." A Dictionary of Literary and Thematic Terms, Second Edition. New York: Facts On File, Inc., 2006.Bloom's Literary Reference Online. Facts On File, Inc.

Thoreau, Henry David. "Thoreau's Civil Disobedience - 1." The Thoreau Reader. Web. 25 Jan. 2012.

Journal 26

Sometimes I think it is okay to break the rules or the law. I think that a lot of rules and laws are very stupid. For example, I think that getting a "ticket" for speed walking in the hallway is absurd. If a kid wants to get to lunch, let him or her get there! Another rule I think is stupid involving school is making everyone stay in the lunch room until the bell rings. If a student wants to get to class sooner and not wait a couple extra minutes, even seconds, for the bell, then they should be able to. I also think it is stupid to not be able to be in the hallways in the morning.

Back to the point of the blog: when it is okay to break the law.

An eye for an eye is an old expression that does not exist in our government these days. Back in the olden days, if you killed someone you would be killed. Nowadays, if you kill someone you go to prison if there is enough evidence against you.

A law that should sometimes be broken is speeding. If you are having a baby, I think your husband should be able to speed to get to the hospital. Same with someone being injured.

A lot of teenagers feel the need to break the law or a rule to have fun. Sometimes it can be fun as long as you do not get caught. The risk is not worth it, though. For example, if you get caught drinking and driving you get your license taken away and may even go to jail. That is not a law that should be broken.

A rule that may be okay to break occasionally is a deadline rule. If you work and can't finish a reflection blog in time, I think you should get a day to catch up. Work is definitely a legitimately reason to not be able to finish homework.

Another rule involves my job. We have to get coded out each time we leave the building. We have to take off our coat and have them pat it down. When it is winter, I don't want to take my coat off. I think that rule should not exist for smaller jackets because it is a hassle for employees.

Reflection: "The Minister's Black Veil"

Edgar Allan Poe is (Present) a famous poet and short story teller in his time period. Poe's stories and poems are still being (Present) read today. They make (present) an impact on people's lives many years from when he was actually alive. A lot of his writings are (present) creative with a dark twist, which is why he fits (present) in to the dark romanticism time period.
In his short story The Pit and the Pendulum, Edgar Allan Poe uses (present) many characteristics of dark romanticism. The story itself is about a soldier who is punished (present) with a death sentence. This obviously is going (present) to start the flow of a dark romanticism story. Romanticism involves (present) a lot of detail, which Poe definitely uses in this short story. He does (present) not fall short of adding the dark part, either. He exceeds (present) in using a dark and dreary setting.
Even in the first paragraph, Poe seems (present) to start with a dreary scene.
Poe wrote (present), "I was (past) sick, sick unto death with that long agony; and when they at length unbound (present) me, and I was permitted (past) to sit, I felt (past) that my senses were leaving (past progressive) me" (Poe 263). This was (past) in the very first paragraph. This description of a painful and dreadful scene definitely makes (present) the reader interested in what doom the narrator is going (past) through.
The next couple of paragraphs remind (present) me of a scene from Harry Potter. Poe writes (present) about "black robed judges" (Poe 263). He talks (present) about how they are frightening (present progressive) him and he does not know what to do. He writes, "They appeared (past) to me white-whiter than the sheet upon which I trace these words- and then even to grotesqueness; thin with the intensity of their expression of firmness- of immovable resolution- of stern contempt of human torture" (Poe 263). This description that Poe gave (past) seems very real, especially the last line. You can feel (present) the pain and fright that the narrator feels (present)just from this short passage. You could tell (present), even without Poe saying it, that these figures are(present) enemies of Poe and that they are thinking of(Present) hurting him. Just by his description you can see (present) how Poe feels about these figures.
Another depressing passage that really stuck (present) out to me was when Poe wrote "I proceeded (past)for many paces, but still all was blackness and vacancy. I breathed (past) more freely. It seemed (past) evident that mine was not, at least, the most hideous of fates" (Poe 266). In this passage, Poe was talking (past progressive) about how he was trying to escape the rushing feelings that he previously had when he was (past) in pain and just step forward. He could barely bring (present progressive) himself to perform this small action. That passage adds (present) a lot of suspense to the story. Poe's short story is (present) already full of suspense due to passages like that. It is (present) part of what makes Poe so famous- his ability to add suspense.
After a lot of suffering Present progressive), the narrator says "By long suffering my nerves had been (Past perfect progressive) unstrung, until I trembled (past) at the sound of my own voice, and had become in every respect a fitting subject for the species of torture which awaited me" (Poe 267). In this passage, the soldier has (past) already been suffering. He has (past) nothing pleasant to look forward to and the torture is just getting worse. At this point is seems (present) impossible for the French Army to get to him in time.
Finally, after much more suffering, he is falling (past progressive) into the abyss when the general grabs his arm (Poe 273). I am actually surprised (present) that he did not die. I assume (present) that he would die (present) because of death being a common theme in Edgar Allan Poe's other work.
This short story is (present) very good and I enjoy (present) reading it.