Tuesday, November 25, 2014

The excellency of the female character vindicated: Carrie Elder, Discussing Social Inequalities pre 1855 to Today

Carrie Elder
Dr. Coronado
English 226
9 Dec 2014
Discussing Social Inequalities pre 1855 to Today
            Thomas Branagan’s The Excellency of the Female Character Vindicated was published in 1807, but the text discusses issues with gender equality still relevant today. Branagan talks about how women are degraded and refused equal right. He explains why this inequality is engrained in men from a very early age. Branagan questions the state of gender politics and relations and why the unequal distribution of power between men and women is inherently wrong and should be abolished. Even with the flaws in Branagan’s writing and the date the text was published, this text should be a part of an American educational curriculum because it will open up a dialogue about the strides modern American has made towards equality among all genders along with the progress society has failed to achieve.
             Branagan begins his assessment on early feminism by discussing the how women are subjugated in society. He writes, “In most parts of the world, the female is considered by the male part of society, merely as an object of sensual convenience and domestic accommodation” (Branagan 69). In this passage, Branagan lays out the pillars of his argument; that women are relegated to roles that are inherently sexual or associated with care giving. His use of the word “convenience” suggests that these roles are restrictive of women’s personal desires and instead cater to the man’s, ensuring an easy method of degrading women. Branagan’s use of the words “men” and “women” ignores people who don’t adhere to the gender binary. Discussing and analyzing this important but often forgotten part of feminist discourse, both today and when this text was published, must be discussed because the way that gender is subverted matters just as much as the way it is adhered to. After this, Branagan states, “My object here is to investigate the radical cause of this degradation” (Branagan 69). This is both the mission statement for his own text, but also for a possible further analysis of this work. Investigating and questioning why power inequalities exist between men, women, and other marginalized groups is important now more than ever, and looking back at the history of oppression between the sexes in America provides important context as to how long these institutional discrepancies have existed.
             Despite its strides, Branagan’s work is clearly not exempt from criticism. This does not deter it from being an important work to analyze; rather, it informs the text’s importance. The parts of the text that are problematic must be addressed in order to understand how even great thinkers are complicit in the power structures that they are trying to dismantle. For example, Branagan writes about women that, “they intend them to be play-actors or dancing girls, instead of being prudent and judicious mothers of respectable families” (Branagan 70). Branagan places an unfair standard between women; that those who deemed respectful and choose to raise children are better than women chose not to. The standard contributes to the unfair and unequal treatment of women due to the fact that it restricts a women’s choice to raise a family or not, and it shames women who are not interested in traditional motherhood. This inconsistency demonstrates how dated Branagan’s text is as it was written before modern conceptions of motherhood and families were created. However, pointing out these inconsistencies in Branagan’s text could lead possible reason that these problems still exist in our culture. This contradiction clearly supports a claim that consistency is important to maintaining an equal stance against oppression, in addition to an idea that even people who are for dismantling inequalities in society can fall prey to oppressive thinking because of how deeply inequality is embedded in our culture.
Branagan even uses poetry as a method of arguing his stance against the degradation of women. At a certain point in the text, he begins by saying, “I can find no language to prove my opinion to be correct, more eloquently than the following” (Branagan 71) before he begins his prose. Using prose as a rhetorical strategy legitimizes Branagan as an educated and talented wordsmith and adds a different layer of analysis to his text. Along with thinking about Branagan’s rhetorical consistencies and inconsistencies, there can also be a discussion about his abilities as a prose writer.  The section of prose included in this text can be scrutinized based on their effectiveness in terms of proving Branagan’s claims and on whether these prose digressions add anything to the overall text. The poems are not included for no reason, but rather they are just as important as any other section of this text.
In one section, Branagan writes “Like the useless butterfly that appears fluttering in the sun on a summer’s day, flying from flower to flower in scented gardens, its beauteous wings are tipt with gold; the enraptured child views with delight and admiration” (Branagan 70). In this example, Branagan demonstrates how women are reduced to just pretty things to look at without including any substance. He does this by including a section of poetry that is written beautifully but lacks any rhetorical substance. He does not make any claims about his thesis in this poem, but rather lets the way these poems are written speak for themselves because they are serving their purpose just by being included with the rest of the text. Branagan’s abilities as a poet speaks volumes to his talent as an overall writer because it shows that he is well versed in different disciplines. This makes him and his text and very valuable input in a curriculum because it shows how a variety of talents can inform a person’s ability to argue their claims. Branagan uses his aptitude as a poet to back up his thesis and that in particular is something that any student can learn from. In addition, he uses poetry in a very clever way rather than just including it for the sake of inclusion.
Although this text was written by a man, it is still vital to a feminist discourse. At the very least, it can provide valuable resources for writings by women. Furthermore, it is the strength of the argument that makes this text credible rather than the gender of the author and the truth of this text that makes it important. As Catherine Gallagher writes, “This smooth, gradual movement from looking into a book to actively seeking its truths to dealing with its arguments – that is, passing them to others – is propelled by a common understanding that truths are nobody’s private property” (Gallagher 312) this principle can be applied to Branagan’s text. The grand truth of this written work is meant to be discussed and questioned because it has already outlasted Branagan himself just by the fact that it is still being read after its publication date. The very notion that a text written in 1807 is still important and relevant today ensures that it must be an important and crucial text to any discipline. Even with the problems with the text, that doesn’t take away from its rhetoric: “Errors may be exclusively attributed, but truths cannot” (Gallagher 312). Even though Branagan contradicted himself early on in this text, the truth of his argument still rings true, in fact it rings even truer since there is now a comparison between his argument and his contradictions. Then those who read this text are left to decide which is more important to examine and agree with.
            Though this text is crucial to a feminist discourse, it is important, however, that Branagan’s text does not overshadow the works of women. As a man, Branagan is still speaking from a place of privilege over women even if he does not agree with the unequal distribution of power among men and women. As evidenced with his lack of acknowledgement to people outside of the gender binary, Branagan had a lot of learning to do. In addition, this text is very dated. Therefore, it is important to include texts from other women scholars since women are directly affected by the unequal structure of power allocated in our society and, therefore, their assessments will be more valuable. Upon assessing this text, the discourse that can be started are ultimately extremely valuable. The issues that Branagan raises are still relevant today, and furthermore it is entirely possible that they were not talked about as openly as they could be now. In knowing this, it can be stressed that the ability to discuss gender and social politics is not one that should be missed whenever it can be done, but rather sought out when the resources are available.





















Works Cited
Gallagher, Catherine. "A History Of The Precedent: Rhetorics Of Legitimation In Women's Writing." Critical Inquiry 26.2 (2000): 309. Literary Reference Center. Web. 25 Nov. 2014.
Packham, Catherine. "DOMESTICITY, OBJECTS AND IDLENESS: Mary Wollstonecraft And Political Economy." Women's Writing 19.4 (2012): 544-562. Humanities International Complete. Web. 25 Nov. 2014.
Branagan, Thomas. “The excellency of the female character vindicated : being an investigation relative to the cause and effects of the encroachments of men upon the rights of women, and the too frequent degradation and consequent misfortunes of the fair sex”. New York : Printed by Samuel Wood. 1807. Web. 

Andrew Nelson - Bluebeard (Working Title)

Andrew Nelson
November 25, 2014
English 226
Dr. Coronado
Bluebeard
America looked very different in the 1840s. We were quite literally only half the nation we are today with states like Iowa and Wisconsin joining the union during this decade. America as we know it was still forming; the famous Oregon Trail expedition was launched from Missouri in 1843, Minnesota became an American territory in 1849. As a country we were busy adopting traditions and custom’s that we still have today. The very first ongoing congressional filibuster occurred in 1841, the dates of our federal elections were set in 1845, and in 1842 the Landmark Supreme Court case Commonwealth v Hunt gave workers the legal right to unionize and trike for the first time in our History. We were very much still trying to figure out who we were as a country and how we wanted to govern ourselves; trying the balance the need for centralized laws with the borderline paranoid fear of (non-divine) higher authority that started at “We the People of the United States…” and continues to this very day. We see for the first time in this decade the lower class citizens beginning to not only realize that the American Dream is not within their reach, but that is it being kept out of their reach by the upper class elite and, more importantly, deciding to do something about it. Its little surprise then, that the publishers of “The New World” would think the American people would relate to the first act of Bluebeard. The lower class was tired of the upper class getting all the benefits of their labor while they themselves barely survived.
Bluebeard opens up with Heymon, the lord of Wallenrod Castle, meeting with his advisors and knights, as well as with a counselor who we are told by Heymon’s brother Conrad “Has given many an excellent piece of advice which is would have been well if any had taken.” (Bluebeard, Act 1) From this we can gather that this counselor has a reputation for being wise enough to give good advice, whether it is taken or not. The character to focus on in this act, however, is Claus who is listed in the character list as “a fool.” They are meeting to discuss how to deal with the treat from a rival lord by the name of Bluebeard who has been concurring other lands surrounding Wallenrod Castle. When we first see Claus he is introduced as such

“Claus: The fool enters; he is small and deformed, hump-backed, lame of a leg, and moves very nimbly upon one crutch.
Conrad: Ah! It is our fool.
Matrin: You Have a Very complete household.
Conrad: Thank God! We deny ourselves nothing. A little man, the fool, whom you see before you there, but he has an excellent, untiring wit of his own. He will make you laugh a whole evening, even without speaking a word. –But a very good disposition.
Claus: Is it allowable, gentlemen, that a fool should come into a rational assembly of counsel?
Conrad: Gracious Heaven! He is a fool, we must allow him a little innocent pleasure, since he does not drink, and is altogether a pretty good fellow. Take a seat fool, and we sensible people will take our seats too. [All sit.]” (Bluebeard, Act 1)
We clearly see that Claus is seen to truly be a fool by the knights and advisors. They clearly like him, calling him ‘altogether a pretty good fellow’ and praising him for how well he does at his job. It is also painfully clear that they do not respect him. Indeed, they go as far as to believe him simple enough that just listening to their ‘rational’ discussion would be an entertainment for him. What really shows their true colors though, is what happens while they are discussing the assault on bluebeard;
“Heymon: And when we have concurred him, shall we then take his castle by storm, and divide his treasure?
Claus: And where will Bluebeard be, meanwhile?
Heymon: Fool, he is to be killed in the battle.
Conrad: And if he be not killed, then he will be clapped in irons.
Heymon: But that he will never agree to, …thus better that he should fall in the fight.
Counselor: Good; ‘t is much better that he should fall in the fights Sir Heymon. You have expressed exactly my opinion.
Conrad: Be if he is not killed after all?
Counselor: Ay Indeed! A good observation of your brother indeed. If he is not killed after all! He will do better to fall in the battle, that’s certain; but men are often very singular. Yes, what think you in this case.” (Bluebeard, Act 1)
Yes, what is Bluebeard is alive? What about Bluebeard? The important thing to notice here is how, despite Claus being the one to bring up questions of Bluebeard’s fate, it is not until Conrad voices the question that it is taken seriously by the counselor, and by extension by everyone else. He accredits Claus’s idea to Conrad, commending him on being wise for thinking of it and it then leads to a discussion between then knights.  We see this same kind of action later in the Act when the knights come upon Bluebeard fighting with another enemy and they wait for the fight to finish and, when Claus suggests they should have attacked Bluebeard while he was fighting someone else as well, they lament not having Counselor with them to have told them that, even though Claus is once again the one to voice the idea. The idea of those higher up in society taking credit for the work and ideas of the lower class was a pretty dear idea to the American people both then and now.




Sources I plan on using:
-          Karl Marx’s Consciousness Derived from Material Conditions
-          Study of Commonwealth v Hunt found at http://moglen.law.columbia.edu/twiki/bin/view/AmLegalHist/BillNahillWikiProject
-          Possibly another case study of Commonwealth v Hunt I found, if I find anything I want to use in the half I haven’t finished reading yet.
-          I may also quote some from Life in the Iron Mill.

Bluebeard Play Link: https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B2gvuXtIs422REc0Y0tkRXZnb28/view?usp=sharing

Quiner Scrapbooks: Correspondence of the Wisconsin Volunteers

Quiner Scrapbooks provided by Wisconsin Historical Society

Casey Baumeister
Professor Coronado
English 226
9 December 2014

Quiner Scrapbooks: Correspondence of the Wisconsin Volunteers

The title of the book that this paper is based on is “Quiner Scrapbooks: Correspondence of the Wisconsin Volunteers, 1861-1865, Volume 2,” and was produced by Edwin Bentley Quiner. The interesting thing about this book is that it is full of newspaper clippings from soldiers fighting on the front lines during the Civil War in Wisconsin, essentially making it a scrapbook about our past. Quiner also included some letters from journalists that were with the troops and also some articles and letters from civilians that were selected to go along with each regiment. The focus in this specific scrapbook is on the years spanning from 1861 to 1865, and it has a page range of 379 with an average of three letters per page. The main locations of the articles differ depending on where the specific regiment is located, and mainly focusing on the different infantries, cavalries, sharpshooters, and volunteers who are initially from Wisconsin. The reason I want to focus on these texts is not only because they are a part of Wisconsin’s history, but also America’s history. In order to add as much detail as I can, I will be focusing on the first 26 pages of the scrapbook, documenting the life of the soldiers and their regiments during the year 1861–1862. Doing this will give insight to the beginning years of the Civil War, the lives that were effected by war, and the reasons they went to war at all—showing the reader the truth of war and how it helped make America the nation it is today.

During my search for information about the writer who created these scrapbooks, I was not able to find a lot. I learned that the scrapbooks begin in 1861, when the Civil War first began, and documents the letters from the people “who were serving at the front” (Wisconsin Historical Society). The type of people who were writing were mainly soldiers but Quiner also made sure to pay attention to anyone in the action, anyone who would know what was happening. Doing this would allow for him to document the war itself from the view of the people witnessing it firsthand. He did this to help form the foundation of his book titled “Military History of Wisconsin: a record of the civil and military patriotism of the state, in the war for the Union…” (Wisconsin Historical Society), which would span into a thousand pages. The scrapbooks themselves, of which there are ten, totaled to 3,793 pages. Quiner organized the scrapbooks into a chronological order and attempted to keep the volumes separated by sections that were dedicated to each distinct regiment. The letters themselves are organized in linear order as well, and (as stated in the paragraph above) has about three letters per page, allowing the reader to follow along with the undertakings of the Civil War in the order that they actually happened. All of this was done, yes to help Quiner create his book, but also to document the bravery and patriotism that Wisconsin proved itself to have.

The first entry that is shown in the scrapbook is dated April 21st, 1862 and is from the Forth Army Corp and shows the dedication the men had towards their country and their beliefs. It states that “the men…await patiently for the approaching battle, when our General will find willing hearts and ready hands willing to do or die in defense of our glorious Union, and ready for the word fight, which all are confident will result in a Federal victory” (Quiner 1). This shows the men of Wisconsin willingness to fight for what they believe in. It shows that the men were not drafted but instead offered their service for their country, for their beliefs, with “willing hearts.” It also shows right off the bat that Wisconsin, like most Northern states, allied with the Union fighters and their Federal beliefs. This willingness and togetherness is one of the main reasons the union won the war. There have been “…many scholars [that] have argued that the key to sustaining modern social order is to develop mediating institutions that connect individuals together into a larger social whole” (Neem 592). Meaning that the feeling of fighting and possibly dying together for a common belief helped form the modern social order that took place after the war. The people that joined together were not all the same. They were more than likely from different stations, but that was not what mattered. What was important was that they all held common ideals for how this nation should be shaped. These ideals are what made America into what it is today and helped form the nation that offered freedom to all that stood on its soil.

It was not only the men that volunteered to help their country though, women stepped up as well. It was the “[p]atriotism and love for her kindred [that] may induce a woman to surrender the comforts and quiet of home for the privations and hardships of the camp” (Quiner 6). Women would be the ones in the background, helping the men with laundry and food, or helping the injured recover. This was not just a man’s battle, it was a nations. This was a war over America and how she should be shaped and everyone had a say in what the outcome would be. Even if there were men in the camps that believed the woman would be “more an inconvenience than an advantage, either as a nurse or a ‘laundress’” (Quiner 6). Yes, this feeling shows that women still were not viewed as equals to men, but we know that will come with time. More importantly, it shows that there were women who wanted to risk their lives next to the men, ones that wanted to help no matter the harm that could come to them. It shows a woman’s desire to be more than she is told to be. This is documented proof that even if they were not wanted, the women made the decision for themselves that they were going to help make a nation that they would want to live in. There were even women who expanded past the idea of helping out in the camps to helping out on the battlefield. There were “…hundreds of women who passed as men to fight on the front lines, refusing to be left behind with weeping mothers and sweethearts or limited to the domestic (although extremely important and difficult) roles of nurse and cook in the army camps” (Teorey 74). Even if the men did not know it, some of them might have put all their faith and trust onto a woman. They protected the men around them. They protected their families and loved ones. But more importantly we see women taking more steps to becoming free and independent. This type of idea, this passion is what helped make America into what it is today. What women do today, the freedom that we have, was something that was fought for all the way back in the Civil War. This was something that was earned outright and can’t be taken away.

The war was not something that only brought around the outcome of freedom though, it also helped produce capital during the war itself. In a letter sent back home, a soldier explains that every year the war makes “…nearly a million of dollars” (Quiner 8). He goes on to explain that the common belief is that the soldier does not “produce” wealth like a farmer or minor might but he “puts money in circulation” (Quiner 8). This shows that there was a common held belief that a soldier has no use like a farmer who puts food on the table or a minor who warms the homes. But the soldier goes on to say that they, the ones fighting for a nation they could believe in, “better the institutions of a people, [and] enhance a nation’s wealth. The revolutionary war paid for itself because it established institutions at least in all the free States” (Quiner 8). In other words, the war helped pay for itself because it made the quality of life better for the people. The Civil War helped build closer societies, bringing individual businesses, such as farming or mining, closer together to help rise the way of living everywhere else and promoting more circulation of wealth. Close-knit institutions, “especially voluntary associations, are vital to modern democratic social orders because they encourage the production of social capital which, in turn, produces social trust” (Neem 592). By bringing society closer together, the war promoted social capital which then allowed the citizens to form trust among each other. Doing this helped them build the social and political institutions that helped form America into the nation it is today and allowed her to grow into something we can be proud of.

The state of the nation was not the only thing to change, but also the state of religion. In an article labelled “Camp Randall Items” there is references to how religion was played out in the camps. It is explained that “Religious services were held at camp for the regiments [with sermons preaching] “’Be thou strong, therefore, and show thyself a man.’ The sermon was a very good one on the qualities essential to true manliness and strength, and was listened to apparently with great interest and attention by the soldiers” (Quiner 11). This shows how exactly religion was playing a part in the war and how it was affecting the soldiers. It shows a devotion that is still there, just because the men were at war does not mean they lost their faith. It shows the recognition that strength is required for what they are undertaking and also the idea that because they are showing this type of strength, the soldiers are validating their manliness and showing how strong they can be. Almost as if they most fight even harder to prove their faith as well. There have been “Several historians [that] have identified the Civil War as marking the initial stages of a transition from a primarily religious understanding of death to a more secular approach to dying” (Scott 844). They would have had to make this change of view point because of the sheer amount of dying. Final words were not always able to be heard. Men were not dying in their beds, some were being buried where they fell (Scott 844). The men needed to have faith that they could fight like men ‘should’ without worrying that it would jeopardize their place in heaven. This marks the change of America’s view of religion, not so much because of a relaxing of morals but out of necessity for change. This shows another change brought on by the Civil War that can still be seen by the people of today.

There was so much faith and dedication to the war that it changed a lot of families and their dynamics, allowing young ones to find a life of their own without necessarily following in their family’s footsteps. In one letter labeled “Going to help Uncle Sam first,” there was a young man who was underage that enlisted himself into the army without his father’s consent. When his father told the boy to come home to help him on the farm because he was not able to pay for someone else to come in and help, “the young man replied: ‘Dear Father:—I can’t go home at present. I should be very glad to help you, but Uncle Sam has got a d—d sight bigger job of thrashing on hand than you have, and I’m bound to see him out of the woods first’” (Quiner 15). This reply shows first the dedication that young men had for their nation and the Union army, so much so that they were volunteering themselves before they were of age and without the consent of their family. While it does show passion for the ideals of the Federal beliefs, it also documents the struggle and need for people to fight in the army. It shows that while the army did have standards and requirements, they did not have the luxury to turn anyone away. It also shows the need for the farmers back home. So many people were off fighting the war, so many family members, that the work force left behind to keep things running were left short-handed. Compromises had to be made. The Civil War wasn’t about the battle between the North and South. It was a battle between different viewpoints and beliefs, it was about what the people wanted America to be and how they wanted to live. This passion is what made America, it’s what drives it still today. Without these men and women fighting, without the will and courage that they had, nothing would be what it is today.

The documents that Quiner collected are not important because they helped write a book. They are important because they show us a past that is real. Those letters are not glorified to make the readers feel comfortable, they are not there to validate choices made or to sucker more people into volunteering. They are there to document the truth. They show the guts and gore laying on the street. They show women and children running for safety when the fighting spreads to their town. These articles tell us how the war allowed the nation to prosper, how it started to change into something that we recognize today. Women had started stepping up, testing their limited freedom. Young men branched away from their families to see what they could do for themselves. The way that religion was viewed changed, relaxing into more individualistic terms. More than anything else the Civil War is what created America. It’s how freedom was earned and how a new society was born. These documentations show us an unedited version of how it happened. We get the view points of the fighters and the also the people left back home. These letters allow the reader to look into their lives and see what they saw and read what it was they were thinking. These letters make the experience personal and make the reader proud of the people who believed in something so strongly that they made the change happen. They show how America was formed and were we came from, and these things can never be taken away.


Works Cited

Neem, Johann N. "Taking Modernity's Wager: Tocqueville, Social Capital, and the American Civil War." Journal of Interdisciplinary History 41.4 (2011): 591-618. MLA International Bibliography. Web. 30 Sept. 2014.

Quiner, Edwin Bentley. “Quiner Scrapbooks: Correspondence of the Wisconsin Volunteers, 1861-1865, Volume 2.” Wisconsin Historical Society (2010): 1-26. Wisconsin Historical Society. Web. 30 Sept. 2014.

“Quiner Scrapbooks: Correspondence of the Wisconsin Volunteers, 1861-1865, Volume 2.” Wisconsin Historical Society. Wisconsin Historical Society, 2010. Web. 30 Sept. 2014.

Scott, Sean A. "'Earth Has No Sorrow That Heaven Cannot Cure': Northern Civilian Perspectives On Death And Eternity During The Civil War." Journal of Social History 41.4 (2008): 843-866. MLA International Bibliography. Web. 30 Sept. 2014.

Teorey, Matthew. "Unmasking the Gentleman Soldier in the Memoirs of Two Cross-Dressing Female US Civil War Soldiers." War, Literature, and the Arts: An International Journal of the Humanities 20.1-2 (2008): 74-93. MLA International Bibliography. Web. 30 Sept. 2014.

Hugh McGuire - The Diaries of Anson W. Buttles



Hugh M. McGuire
English 226
Dr. Coronado
November 25, 2014
The Diaries of Anson W. Buttles
            My father, who attended college in the 1970’s, has told me that the books and poems for his American literature courses were chosen on the basis of what some people (mostly men, mostly white) thought were great works of literature. Their literary greatness was the primary factor in their inclusion; some other works were chosen because they contributed specifically to the American experience. The most preferred works were those that combined both criteria.  Out of them, America created a three-step narrative that began with the arrival of Europeans, who looked to their old world for their cultural ideals. Then followed the emersonian reaction that called for a particularly American literature. Paul Douglass puts it another way: “Those who have been recently ‘canonized’ like Emerson and Fennimore Cooper, stood at the head of a list to which later writers and thinkers would be added, like rings on the great trunk of the American cultural tree. They preserved and extended the wished-for tradition” (26). Finally, in the rubric that my father was taught, American literature, with its own voice, became the dominant tradition in world literature.   
The curriculum of those 1970’s American Literature courses was exclusionary, as the contents pages of my father’s copy of The American Tradition in Literature, 3rd Edition makes plain (Bradley v-xii). As college English majors, students in that decade were not taught Phyllis Wheatley, slave narratives or captivity narratives. There was no discussion of Life in the Iron Mills. In the nearly 800 pages of  The American Tradition, Elizabeth Bradstreet is the only woman whose work is given credibility.
            American Literature courses are more inclusive today. Wheatley is there and so are the slave and captivity narratives. Native American poems often show up as well. And the story of American Literature is no longer the three steps to world literary domination. 
              However, some thing is still missing from American Literature courses. Jefferson, Emerson, Hawthorne, Melville and Whitman are still 19th century male masters, along with their comrade Emily Dickenson, and the expansion to include narratives of the marginalized, but where are the other people who lived America.  If students of American literature are to understand the contexts from which captivity narratives differ – and slave narratives differ – students need to see and read pieces comparable to those other narratives.  It is misleading in some way to read Emily Dickenson beside “Life in Iron Mills” and it is also illuminating.  But something equally illuminating might be reading the memoirs of an everyday American who is earnest but not necessarily as clever or deep as Herman Melville.  Such a man is Anson Buttles and his interesting memoir.
Anson Buttles was born early in 1821 in Pennsylvania.  His family moved to Wisconsin, and he lived most of his life in Fox Point, a township just outside of Milwaukee.  Mr. Buttles’ consistent source of income was from farming, however, he also worked for the city of Milwaukee as Town Clerk, County Surveyor, Justice of the Peace, School Clerk, and County Superintendent for the County of Milwaukee in Fox Point, Wisconsin.  His life thus was a combination of rural and urban existence and therefore it is not a life that is easily categorized.  What unifies his life is that banality is key.
From the years 1856 right up to his death in 1906 he kept a diary.  And every day’s entry is part of an accumulation of the trite things of life that add up to a happy, satisfying existence. But Buttles also saw and noted a variety of current and historical events. He did so in two ways. Sometimes he merely noted the anniversary of an event from the old world or he lamented certain current events. In some instances he laments us on current events such as the Lady Elgin steamboat disaster which occurred on September 8, 1860. There are other instances when he mentions historical events in passing for example on February 8, 1860 he simply says” Mary Queen of Scots killed 1587” (Buttles     )
What this combination shows is that whilst living the life of a rural urban fellow his sense of culture isn’t blindly American the way Emerson and the leading writers of the day wanted to be.  He’s still stuck in the past of Europe so what we’re seeing is a man of the times responding with the education he received to things that we now look upon in other ways.







Works Cited
Bradley, Sculley et al. The American Tradition in Literature. New York: Norton, 1967.
 Print.
Douglass, Paul. “Loose Canon on the Deck: Curriculum Wars of the Nineties.“ Pacific
 Coast Philology 24.1-2(1991):26-34. Print.
McGuire, Patrick. Personal Interview.  13 October 2014.

Letter PDF Link: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1hOF89Z9Ykyh1evoCD4R8TSOiAo6QZ48oyUNAH7aI9E4/edit?usp=sharing


Living Like Laura: Letters of Laura Lathrop

Allyson Neudeck
Dr. Coronado
ENGL 226
9 December 2014
Living Like Laura
Laura Lathrop was born in Racine, Wisconsin in 1845. She later began teaching in East Troy, Wisconsin in the early 1860s. In a series of letters located in the University of Wisconsin-Parkside archive library, there is correspondence between her and a couple of her friends. These letters discuss a handful of things concerning the health of Laura and her family, as well as the health of her friends as well. Also talked about in the letters is the religious beliefs of Ms. Lathrop’s friends. These letters are hugely important to understanding the time period because the pure honesty in which they are written gives the readers confidence in their authenticity. Through these letters readers are given the opportunity to see firsthand how the living conditions were in Wisconsin, as well as insight as how important religion was to the people in Wisconsin at the time.
Despite the focus being on Laura, not a single letter is written by her hand. Instead, the letters are addressed to Laura, but from her sister and a handful of her friends, as well as some others. Readers are left to surmise Laura’s opinions and beliefs based on the things her friends are asking and telling her. The history of Ms. Lathrop is given throughout a handful of the letters. In the first recovered letter dated November 11, 1857, Laura is writing to her sister Louisa. One concern of this letter is that Laura requests her sister not show it to a friend Mary, because “Mary can write better than [Laura]” (Letter 2). This is not the first instance that an apology or a plead is made because of the quality of the writing of the letter. In the second disclosed letter, Laura’s friend Susie is returning correspondence with Laura. Susie apologizes for her poor writing by saying, “I have got the hiccups and you must excuse bad writing” (Letter 2). Susie later on apologizes again for the poor writing and begs Laura to not show the letter to anyone else because of the state she is in. Poor health conditions are frequently mentioned in the letter as well.
On numerous occasions, especially those concerning Ms Lathrop’s friend Susie, do the letters contain explanations of the health of those writing or receiving the letters. Laura’s friend Susie suffers from severe headaches and frequently mentions them. A S.M. Montague must write a letter on behalf of Susie because of her poor state of health. Not only is her friend in poor condition, but her mother as well. As time goes on, it appears that most of those around Laura are not fairing so well. The importance of this comes from the fact that these letters are not written by scholars or people hoping that their words will outlive them as well as generations after them. These letters are simple correspondence between friends, so the explanation of what is happening at the time will be more honest than a text whose intention is to be in the canon. The mention of the health condition of Laura’s friends comes as simply as it would in modern day. Readers have a chance to see how conditions are explained from the point of view of an average person. Someone who is just living in the times and talking to her friend is suffering from persistent headaches and a bad case of the hiccups. Readers are given this information in a simpler and more realistic way than through texts specifically talking about poor health conditions. After the first few letters, the topics shift and the corresponder changes as well.
The second half of Laura’s letters fall into the timeline of the American Civil War, or right before 1865. It is in this short time that Laura not only loses her sister Louisa but also her brother William. One of the last letters included is an incomplete letter written to Laura by her friend Mary J. Felch. This letter is the most intriguing because her friend’s only focal point is on begging Laura to be more religious, and it seems as though Laura is finally contending to entertain Felch’s wish. This emphasizes the importance of this letter series.
Mary is ultimately immensely concerned with Laura’s faith, or lack thereof. It becomes apparent to anyone reading these letters that Laura is either struggling with her faith or does not feel any sort of connection to God. This is interesting considering the fact that in the 1800s, the two major denominations in Wisconsin were Catholicism and Lutheran (familysearch.org). It appears, according to Mary Felch, that Laura does not find her religious identity with either denomination. Mary begs Laura: “O. you know not how much I want you to give your heart to God, how much I want you to leave the pleasures of this sinful world” (Letter 5). Though Mary is discreet and does not mention what kinds of sins Laura is partaking in, one can surmise that Laura seems to be a tad odd in her reluctance to participate in religious activity.
The importance of these letters comes from the brute honesty of them, which includes the poor grammar and the apologies of the writers for this. These letters were clearly meant for no other eyes than the ones writing and the intended receiver, anyone else who can read these letters hundreds of years later can appreciate the context of them. These letters were not meant for large audiences, so the candid honesty of the writer is apparent. Unlike many popular writings where they were written with the intention of reaching a broad spectrum of readers, Laura Lathrop’s letters include a kind of honesty that is unique to secret correspondence. These letters lack any kind of embellishment of the circumstances of the time. They were not written with the intention of creating awe or even educating future audiences. These letters were created to inform the person for which they were addressed, and no one else.
The simplicity with which they are written can create a certain level of trust with the person reading them. When Laura’s friend Mary pleads with Laura to “come now while your Father calls” (Letter 5). The reader has the assurance that this plea is genuine, and not for show for a larger audience. Mary later warns Laura, stating that “shall that hand be withdrawn, that small voice be silent, & you go & you go to the place of eternal misery” (Letter 5). In this instance, this warning is not necessarily to be taken as a moral warning like in fictional stories. This is a friend being genuinely concerned for another friend and the supposed wrong path she is taking.
In many writings of this time religion is a focal point, and that is no different in Laura Lathrop’s series of letters. However, one large difference is the nature of the way religion is discussed. Mary’s warnings and pleadings show the reader that Laura was in no way a religious person, nor did she really care to be religious. These letters do share some similarities, which also show their importance. The ways in which religion is discussed by Mary is similar to other works. Religion was needed to explain the ways in which the world moved. Mary tells Laura “I do not think that Louise would have been so willing to have left this world if she had not chosen Christ” (Letter 5). Mary uses religion to soothe the pain of Laura’s sister’s death as well as giving another reason as to why Laura must decide to become a child of the Lord. Though the letters deviate from the typical view of religion they still have many of the same themes as other texts of this time.
The most interesting part of the letters, in my opinion, is the feeling of desperation with which Felch writes to Laura. She seems almost terrified that Laura seems so reluctant to proclaim herself a Christian. Felch goes so far as to appeal to Laura’s own personal life, and asks Laura “O, are you afraid to let your friends & associates know that you want to live for christ are you afraid of their taunts & sneers” (Letter 5). In this section, Felch makes the assumption that the reason Laura is not a religious person is because of her fear of prosecution by her peers. Since none of the letters include Laura’s own beliefs, readers are left to wonder whether or not this is true, or if Laura simply does not believe religion to have the same level of importance that her friend does. She becomes an outlier here, since the overwhelming majority of people held some sort of religious belief. In Barbara Welter’s The Cult of True Womanhood: 1820-1860 she writes, “Religion or piety was the core of women’s virtue, the source of her strength” (152). In direct contrast, if Ms. Lathrop did not find herself to be a religious woman, it would make sense for her friends to pose some serious concern. It would be that Ms. Lathrop was seen as being less virtuous than her peers. Felch’s concern over Laura’s supposed sinful ways comes from the belief that a women’s virtue came from her religious beliefs. According to Welter, “religion belonged to woman by divine right, a gift of God and nature” (152). If religion was a gift of God and Laura was refusing it, it would give right to Felch to be as concerned as she was. What makes this interesting is the fact that it seems as if Felch had been persistent in her desires for Laura to join her in Bible study, and that Laura was finally contending to go. Felch writes, “I do hope that you will take part in the meeting” (Letter 5). It gives the impression that Felch believes Laura might not be an active participant, and that she is only going to appease her friends. Since readers are not given Laura’s own input, they are left to wonder if Laura was truly interested in becoming a Christian, which makes these handful of letters incredibly interesting.
Laura Lathrop’s letters are an honest view into the life of a simple teacher in the Midwest, and can show readers the living conditions of that time as well as health concerns, and the important beliefs that some people had concerning religion. By being a woman who was not outrightly religious, Ms. Lathrop went against what was seen as the norm of the time, which brings about thought provoking questions of the life of a person who did not blatantly rejoice their religious beliefs.

Works Cited
Lathrop, Laura. “Letters, 1857-1866.” Unpublished.
Welter, Barbara. “The Cult of True Womanhood: 1820-1860.” American Quarterly 18.2 (1966)
151-174. Web.
"Wisconsin Church Records." Wisconsin Church Records. The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-
Day Saints, n.d. Web. 24 Nov. 2014.







Alyssa Gutin: Speech by Reverend William Brisbane



Alyssa Gustin
Dr. Teresa Coronado
English 226
9 December 2014
From Slave-owner to Abolitionist: The Life of William Brisbane
Early American literature was created during a time when this nation was beginning to find its own identity. It is meant to educate those who read it about the lives of the people during those times, and to make a difference. One piece that does this is a speech by William Brisbane entitled, “Speech of Reverend William H. Brisbane lately a slaveholder in South Carolina; containing an account of the change in his views on the subject of slavery”. In this speech, Brisbane gives an account of what caused him to go from being a slave owner to becoming an abolitionist. This speech gives us a look into the past and explains how a person with such strong beliefs can have their opinion changed so dramatically. The reasons behind his change in life style are the most interesting and relevant parts of his entire speech. Literature, religion, and his identity as an American all contributed to his lifestyle change, and they are also relevant to many Americans today, which makes this speech valuable to the American literature canon. 
William Brisbane was a Baptist pastor, born in South Carolina in 1806. He came from a family of slave owners and inherited those slaves as he grew older. Being a slave owner, Brisbane was first dedicated to the defense of slavery and even published several writings about it. Later on, however, Brisbane became a devoted abolitionist who ended up buying back all the slaves he had sold and freeing them. Religious historian Wallace Acorn says the Brisbane:
was not a first-rank abolitionist, mind you, but he knew them all. And he stood head and shoulders above those better known because he not only opposed slavery and fought against it, but he had actually freed his slaves. He spoke with a conviction few could share. (“Dissenting Baptists” 4)
Brisbane even became associated with other famous abolitionists such as like Harriet Beecher Stowe and William Lloyd Garrison (wallaceacorn.org). Eventually, Brisbane’s anti-slavery views caused him to be driven out of the south, so he settled down in Wisconsin, where he founded the town of Arena, and he died there in 1878.
            Brisbane’s speech was first given in Cincinnati in 1840, and was later issued as a pamphlet. It gives an account of what caused him to become an abolitionist. In the end of the speech he makes a plea for his audience to join the abolitionist cause. Throughout the entire speech, Brisbane uses rhetoric that is similar to the rhetoric used in slave narratives, such as promoting humanitarianism and making overt appeals to the audience. Brisbane does this right in the first line of his speech, when he said:
BY the grace of God, having been fully convinced that slavery, perpetual, involuntary servitude, is a condition of wrong to man, and on the part of the master, of sin against God, I feel it a duty to myself as well as to society, to make known in a public manner, that I most heartily repent of all part that I have heretofore voluntarily taken in supporting this unholy system of wrong and oppression. (Brisbane)
He first renounces slavery as something that is wrong and admits to his past as slave-owner. This sets up his entire speech and even when he is giving a narrative of his own life, he still maintains an emotional edge in the speech that reminds the reader or listener that this is not simply a biography of Brisbane’s life, but is also meant to be persuasive. Brisbane himself was persuaded to become an abolitionist, and he cites different pieces of literature, religion, and his identity as an American as the three reasons behind his lifestyle change.
            Literature was what first affected Brisbane’s views on slavery. In the speech, Brisbane first began to think about abolition after reading an anti-slavery pamphlet. This pamphlet did not change his point of view immediately, but he does give credit to it for making him think about why people would be pro-slavery. The literature that really caused him to begin doubting his views was Dr. Wayland’s chapter on Personal Liberty from his work “Elements of Moral Science”. Brisbane said that it, “produced a powerful effect on [his] feelings, and [he] began to doubt the correctness of the views [he] had been entertaining” (Brisbane). He attempted to reply to the chapter in order to defend slavery, but found that his argument was lacking as it went against his principles as a republican. Feeling unsettled by this, Brisbane began to seriously question his opinions on slavery and came to the conclusion that, “…if freedom be a good, slavery is an evil” (Brisbane). Literature is what started Brisbane down the path to abolitionism, which changed to nature of his life and all that he knew. Since it had such a strong effect upon Brisbane, Brisbane’s speech also holds the power to do so as well.
            Brisbane’ religion also helped to change his ways. Before becoming an abolitionist, Brisbane had tried to say that the Bible justified slavery, and that slavery was necessary. However, just as he looked through Dr. Wayland’s chapter and found ways that slavery was wrong, he did so as well while reading the Bible. While reading the Old Testament, he discovered that, “slavery was regarded as a curse to be made use of as a punishment for crime… that it secured the servant against cruel treatment, by demanding his freedom for the loss of even a tooth” (Brisbane). While he may have not been a cruel slave-owner, there were certainly those who were cruel, and the Bible states that those who are cruel to their slaves must be punished for doing so. Brisbane also states, “Does not the Bible say, What God hath joined together, let not man put asunder? And do not the laws of slavery empower the wicked man to separate husbands and wives, and tear the infant from its mother's breast?” (Brisbane). American slavery separated those relationships most sacred to human lives, and the Bible was strictly against men breaking apart those relationships. The cons of slavery in the Bible far outweighed the pros of slavery, and so Brisbane discovered that he could no longer use the Bible as a basis for his pro-slavery beliefs. As a way to begin spreading his newly found beliefs, when Brisbane bought back the slaves he had sold, he wrote a letter to the buyer of the slaves. In the letter, he states, “I was wrong to sell those I had. — I had no right from God to them, and thus convinced, I shall never be easy in mind until I can get them out of bondage fairly and honestly” (Brisbane). While this probably did not convince the buyer to get rid of all his slaves, Brisbane successfully got those slaves back and freed them as a way to rid himself of the sinfulness of slavery. Brisbane’s religious beliefs are what caused him to take action, and the same can be said about many people in modern times.
            Perhaps the most relevant reason for Brisbane’s lifestyle change, in regards to the American literature canon, was his identity as an American. As liberty and independence are so commonly seen within the contexts of American writing, Brisbane’s values as an American stemmed off of those concepts. Brisbanes states that, “…as a man, con-scious of my own rights, and jealous of those rights, I feel that that man is degraded, who is so humbled as not to know he has a right to liberty and independence” (Brisbane). Slavery did not offer freedom or independence to those who were oppressed by the institution. Brisbane believed that if someone was to support slavery, they could not then identify themselves as an American since America was founded on ideologies that go against slavery. Not only do his own beliefs about the identity of Americans come into play during the speech. In the speech, Brisbane even used the Declaration of Independence and the principles of the founding fathers in order to defend his belief that slavery was wrong, and he said:
And hence it is, that our noble fathers made no attempt to prove that all men are created equal, that they have a natural right to liberty; they did not dream that their sons would be such simpletons as to require proof of this; and hence, instead of attempting to demonstrate it, they called it a self-evident truth.” (Brisbane)
. Brisbane thought that the phrase “all men are created equal” should be inclusive to all men, regardless of race, and that the Declaration of Independence also supported this idea. Since the founding fathers claimed that all men are created equal, that belief should be upheld and applied to all men. Therefore, those who would go against slavery are truly American, as they support liberty and independence for all.
            Throughout the entirety of our American literature class, we have examined pieces of literature that define what it means to be an American, as well as have taught us about life in early American history. William Brisbane’s speech, without question, does all of this and then some. Just as literature had a profound effect upon Brisbane, as it is what set his abolitionism into motion, literature in modern times can also effect the live of readers. The pieces read in this class have given insight into the lives of those narrators or characters in them, and this speech certainly gives us an understanding of the life of Brisbane. The literature read also always had a presence in everything read in early American literature since the country was settled because of the beliefs of religious freedom. Religion was what truly set Brisbane into action when it came to defending abolition. The most obvious reason for Brisbane’s speech being included in the American literature canon is, of course, the fact that Brisbane himself was an American and identified himself as such. Having that American identity so strongly present in his speech that supported abolitionism makes Brisbane something of an American icon, as he stood for the very principles that this country was founded on. Since he can be seen as an American icon because of all these factors, his speech should be included in the American literature canon.




















Works Cited
Alcorn, Wallace. "Dissenting Baptists: The Glory of a Hated People." Baptisthistory.org. First       Place Sermon. (2003).
---. "William Henry Brisbane 1806-1878." wallacealcorn.org. Web. 25 Nov. 2014.
Brisbane, William. "Speech of Rev. Wm. H. Brisbane Lately a Slaveholder in South Carolina;       Containing an Account of the Change in His Views on the Subject of Slavery. :: Turning  Points in Wisconsin History." Wisconsinhistory.org. Wisconsin Historical Society.  (1840).