Balance

Both George Will and Stephen Greenblatt take radical views on literature and how people should interpret it.  Will opposes the ideology that “all literature is, whether writers are conscious of it or not, political.” (111)  He explains how “this ideology radically devalues authors and elevates the ideologists-the critics- as indispensable decoders of literature”(111).  He feels that by people “deconstructing” authors works they loose sight of what the author was actually trying to explain and then use it as their own political weapon. Overall “critics strip literature of its authority.” (112)

In rebut to Will’s article Literary politics, Stephen Greenblatt explains how analyzing what politically is going on in that time period can aid in the reading and interpretation of the authors work.  Greeblatt sees “art” as “not cement.  It is mobile, complex, elusive, disturbing.” (115)  Greenblatt feels that every angle should be interpreted and that we need to interpret the basics of the literature to be able to understand deeper aspects of the literature.  “It is similarly difficult to come to terms with what The Tempest has to teach us about forgiveness, wisdom, and social atonement if we do not also come to terms with its relations to colonialism.” (115)

I think both sides have good arguments, but I feel that you need to mix both aspects together to create a balanced idea.  I often feel that people dive to deep into the analysis of a certain literature, and then apply ideas that didn’t even exist during the authors time period.  I believe authors express underlying issues in their work that could be politically relevant to their time period.  For example, Native Son, written by Richard Wright, portrays the harsh reality of a teenage African American living in the ghetto during the 1930s.  Wright wrote this during the 1940s when African American’s were being discriminated against, I believe he was trying to make a statement on how African Americans were treated and show how society pushed them to do certain things.  So overall I think it’s important to know when literature was written and the political and social status of the time, that way you came make a balanced analysis.

Caliban

In Shakespeare’s The Tempest, Caliban is mistreated because he is native to the island and different. When Trinculo and Stephano meet Caliban on the island, they act disgusted just at the sight of him.  Because Caliban doesn’t look like them they immediately infer that he is not as civilized as they are.  Stephano mocks Caliban by saying, “Do you put tricks upon ’s with savages and men of Ind, ha?” (Act 2, Scene 2) (Are you playing tricks on me by showing me savages and uncivilized men from the Indies, ha?).    In Charles Bressler's Literarcy Criticism: An Introduction to Theory and Practice), he explains how it is “the assumption that Western Europeans, and, in particular, the British people, were biologically superior to any other race- a term for class of people based on physical, cultural distinctions, or both”.  When the British met races different from their own, they assume that they are not as civilized as they are, and thus feel the obligation of colonizing the area and civilizing the people. In the Tempest, Prospero, Trinculo, and Stephano take advantage of Caliban and view him as a “monster” and “savage”.  They take advantage of his knowledge of the land and then use him as a slave. 

Shakespeare portrays Caliban in a negative light.  Caliban comes across as gullible, uncivilized, and savage.  Caliban is ignorant of humans, and when he meets Stephano and tastes his alcohol he falls to his knees worshipping Stephano.  He sees him as a God and wants to serve him.  Shakespeare in some ways has justified colonization, by showing how easily susceptible Caliban is to Stephano’s alcohol.  This shows Caliban is uncultured, and trusting.  In the video called, How Hollywood Stereotyped the Native Americans, it shows how the Native Americans were portrayed as savages and monsters.  This is very similar to how Caliban was shown.  He looked and behaved differently than the whites.  To Stephano and Trinculo he was a monster.  Hollywood promoted the white image even though the White’s were the ones taking the land of the Native Americans and were killing the people, but Hollywood knew that their audience was primarily white.  In the same way, Shakespeare’s The Tempest was directed toward the British audience. Both were promoting their own culture rather than telling the truth.

The Tempest- Act 1

Prospero manipulates his past history so that the wrongs that were done against him seem outrages. He exaggerates his story to his daughter to get her sympathy from her. He refers to his brother by saying, “that a brother should be so perfidious!” Acting disgusted by his brother’s antics. He then goes on to say that he gave his undying trust to his brother, “As my trust was, which had indeed no limit, a confidence sans bound.” He paints him self in the light that he didn’t possibly do anything wrong and that his good intentions were turned against him by his brother. By getting the sympathy from his daughter he can control her and how she views him. He uses this same type of technique with Ariel and Caliban. When Ariel tries to ask about her freedom, Prospero gets angry and uses the guilt from her past to persuade her that he is doing a honorable thing by “helping” her out. He emphasizes on how bad her treatment was by saying, “To lay upon the damned, which Sycorax could not again undo. It was mine art”. He explains how he was the only one that could free her. By reminding Ariel how terrible her torture was, and by showing how kind it was that he saved her, he is able to get Ariel to be submissive and to obey his orders. Prospero treats Caliban harshly. He constantly reminds Caliban who his mother is “Thou poisonous slave, got by the devil himself upon thy wicked dam, come forth!” By Prospero doing this it’s like he is reminding Caliban constantly how low of a “class” Caliban is in, and how honored he should be to be in front of Prospero. He also guilt’s Prospero in reminding how generous he was to the boy when he first arrived and how Caliban took advantage of that and tried to rape Miranda. Prospero manipulates the people around him by making them feel like they owe Prospero in some way. He often embellishes his stories to enhance his control over the people around him.

How Biased is history?

It was interesting to hear everyone’s comments about the Texas history debate. Somebody brought up the whole idea that there should be a non-biased textbook to help teach the children. In my personal opinions I don’t think it is possible to create non-biased textbook. If their was such a thing the whole book would only be filled with dates. You couldn’t tell how or why certain events took place because you would automatically be putting some biased opinions in there. I think the best way to fix the problem would be to create a textbook that has multiple opinions and views, that way the students could compare all the sides and then develop their own opinions on the subject. Another factor that contributes to this is how the teacher teaches. Just like the textbook issue, teachers are also always going to be biased toward a certain side or point of view. This will influence how the students view things. I think a way to help stop much of this influence on the students is by having the teacher keep an open mind on what there are teaching and state all the views on the subject, that way the students aren’t only exposed to one point of view. For example, I have had a History teacher who was a strong democrat, but he kept an open mind while teaching the students. He didn’t try to persuade his students to think a certain way politically, but rather he taught the information from all aspects and then let the students decide how they felt. I’m not saying that he was never biased, but he did a good job of trying to balance everything out. Overall this is a tough situation to fix but it is also vital that is be correct, because you don’t want the Texas students getting taught a one sided view of American history. The students need to be exposed to all the GOOD and BAD that has happened in American history, this way they can learn from the past and not relive the mistake’s that their forefathers had gone through.