A Literary Debate

As students of the post modernism society we have begun to see ideas not backed by millions of dollars flood the world. Through the help of the internet people have started to realize that only one interpretation of everything is not feasible. No piece of literature can mean only one thing to everyone who reads it. On the other hand, schools have not caught up with this idea. English classes still expect you to read a piece and know the authors tone. Only one problem. I do not hear the author, and neither does anyone else. Welcome to multiple guess.

            George Will takes a very similar position in saying that the purposes of literary writings has become a matter of political gain, not related to the culture of the time period it was written in. George Orwell states that literary works are considered "a literary canon [as] an instrument of domination." If this were true then all works ever written would have been with the intention of keeping someone below them. But what about the feminists such as Emily Dickinson. She was obviously not in a position of power  over anyone and yet she still wrote poems. Poems alluding to feminist rage for being dominated over. George Will believes that literary interpretations have become centered about politics.

            Stephen Greenblatt assumes a much more liberal approach to the interpretation of literature. He is bold enough to challenge that Shakespeare's The Tempest is not about imperialism. He states this because "it is very difficult to argue that The Tempest is not about imperialism. It is, of course, about many other things. These other things are what literary scholars should investigate. It should not become a matter of politics and only one way to read a text.

Shakespeare and Colonialism

            Throughout history the group with the most power and largest audience has been able to justify the colonization of people deemed less civilized with the use of rhetoric, imagery, and other forms of media. The natives to a certain area are portrayed as primitive compared to the group with the secret agenda to obtain more land, subjects, and/or resources. Excuses such as educating or taming the savage natives are used to justify the colonization, (hostile takeover), of these people.

            Throughout The Tempest Shakespeare describes a situation in which he makes you feel sad for how Caliban was tricked and enslaved (colonized) while also feeling that Prospero's actions are justified because he taught the unsophisticated native how to speak and educated him in advanced methods of survival. Shakespeare describes many situations to support Caliban's case as undeserving of his current treatment. For example, Caliban speaks of how he "showed [Prospero] all the qualities o' th' isle, the fresh springs, brine pits, barren place and fertile" (Shakespeare 42). Shakespeare then validates Prospero's actions towards Caliban by Miranda's explanation that she "pitied [Caliban], took pains to make [Caliban] speak, taught [Caliban] each hour one thing or another" (Shakespeare 45). Overall Shakespeare seems to side with Caliban when he shows Prospero's harsh treatment of Caliban. For example, when Caliban tries to resist his servitude to Prospero, Prospero threatens to "[Caliban] shalt have cramps, side stitches that shall pen thy breath up" (Shakespeare 42). Hollywood on the other hand felt no shame for giving false and undesired stereotypes to ethnic groups such as the Native Americans. In the cultural studies article Great Britain is described as "the chief imperialist power of the nineteenth century, dominat[ing] her colonies, and then give up her their countries' raw materials..." (Ashcroft 236). The institution of slavery became acceptable and justified.

The Tempest Act I Prospero

Throughout the first act in Shakespeare's The Tempest Prospero is able to manipulate the world around him with the use of magic. He casts a storm with the help of Ariel to shipwreck his brother, who supposedly stole the throne from Prospero, and his brother's companions who helped to overthrow Prospero. Before the play begins he uses Caliban to learn the secrets of the island he is now stranded on. On the island he has spent his time educating  his daughter of her past as he sees fit. He ensures her of the validity of her studies and of the evilness of his brother.

            More subtly, he also uses stories and other styles of speech to manipulate Caliban, Miranda, and Ariel to ensure that they continue to perform the tasks he desires. For example, when Ariel discusses the possibility of gaining his freedom from Prospero's servitude, Prospero immediately reminds him of how Sycorax "confined [Ariel] by help of her more potent ministers and in her unmitigable rage, into a cloven pine..." (Shakespeare 36). By reminding her of these events he attempts to make her feel ungrateful and regret wishing to leave her master. Furthermore, when telling Miranda of her past he claims that he was dedicating his time to valuable subjects when "in [his] false brother awakened an evil nature" (Shakespeare 20). In addition, when giving orders to the reluctant Caliban, he makes Caliban appear to be the bad guy by bringing up events such as when Caliban "lodged in [Prospero's] own cell till thoust didst seek to violate the honor of [Prospero's] child" (Shakespeare 42). Prospero uses his rhetoric and stylistic devices to manipulate the people around him.

Socratic Circle Number 1

I'm sure when socratic circles were explained to the class most of the students decided they were going to have nothing to say and that this exercise was going to accomplish nothing. Group one got off to a slow start, this being the first socratic circle of the year, but soon the ideas were bouncing back and forth and most everyone had an opinion to share. Most people agreed that a bias towards any particular subject in history was imminent. Others said that only the most blatant facts should be placed in a textbook. Others believed that a teacher having the only copy of the textbook and teaching it to the students would be the best form of learning. How things are represented in a textbook or taught by the teacher will determine the connotation which people feel towards certain events. The second group admittedly didn't understand the paper they read and simply continued the first group's argument, paying little attention to what their article pertained to. Fortunately for them it was an article in response to the topic the first group discussed. They ignored facts and ideas that were only presented in their article and focused on textbooks and bias rather than the author's possible solutions. Neither group made very many arguments about the viewpoints of multiple ethnic groups. The general feeling was that all ethnic groups should have a voice in history. Overall the discussions were enlightening and well debated.