selected freshman essays 14

1

Edited byDr. Katrina Shilts

andProf. Isaiah Vianese ’08

Selected Freshman Essays at Elmira College

Class of 2014

The editors wish to thank Carrie Geer, Director of Publications, for her formatting; Dr. Stephen Coleman, Dean of Faculty, for his generous support of this text; Dr. John P. LoVecchio, Director of the Freshman Writing Program, for his guidance; Writing Lecturers Dr. Nikki Dragone, Elektra Gaebelein, Ingrid Hungerford, For-rest Lehman, Camasin Middour, T. Brice Pearce, Kellie Schiavone, and Dustin Zima for their essay submissions; and Dr. Barbara Snedecor, Director of the Center for Mark Twain Studies, for her grace and assistance. This year’s edition is dedicated with great fondness to Dr. John P. LoVecchio. We wish you health and happiness in your retirement.

3

Table of Contents

Introduction ............................................................................................................................1The Term I Mark Twain Project: A Study of Tom Sawyer

Paige Kleinfelder ’14 “The Adventures of Mark Twain’s Characters” ...................1Part I: The Summer Writing AssignmentPart II: Reputation PaperPart III: Illustration PaperPart IV: Education Paper

Term I WritingBecky Matturro ’14 “Herodotus vs. Thucydides: Who is the Better Historian?” .... 12Taryn Rumsey ’14 “Herodotus: The More Accessible Historian” ........................13Elizabeth Forrest ’14: “Surrender is Not in a Spartan’s Vocabulary” ................... 14Braiden Sorgenfrei ’14 “A Spartan’s Decision” ....................................................16Brayden Abbey ’14 “Contemporary Friendship and Selflessness” ....................... 17Allison Nobles ’14 “The Stoic Worldview of Marcus Aurelius” ...........................19

Constitution Day Essay Contest WinnerMorgan Kilcullen ’14 “Mandatory Service: Never a Good Idea” ......................... 21

Twenty-Page Research PaperSamuel Pine ’14 “The Power of Speech and Reason:

The Enduring Importance of Rhetoric” ...................................................24Freshman Writing Prize Winner

Cassondra Bruce ’14 “Amending the Constitution for the Benefit of the Economy: A Proposal” ..............................................................................36

Mark Twain Writing Contest WinnerPaul Kappanadze ’14 “An Unlikely Hero” ............................................................45

Term II Analytical Responses to Selected TextsLeonardo da Vinci’s Notebooks

Katie Budd ’14 “Leonardo: An Artistic Visionary” ..............................................49Roman Kononenko ’14 “Leonardo da Vinci’s Use of Mathematics in Art” .......52

Lord Chesterfield’s Letters to His SonZachary Barbour ’14 “Can Your Father Be Your Friend?: The Theme of

Friendship in Lord Chesterfield’s Letters” ...............................................54Elizabeth Morgan ’14 “The Importance of Tone” ................................................56

Never Give In!: The Best of Winston Churchill’s SpeechesNatasha Wagner ’14 “Honesty and Emotion in the Speeches of

Winston Churchill” ..................................................................................58Skyler Duncan ’14 “Churchill’s Speeches as Morale Boosters” ............................59

Term II Creative Responses to TextsRebecca Miller ’14 “Strict, Clever, Moral, or Nurturing:

A Drama on Parenting” ............................................................................ 61Annie Goodenough ’14 “Chocolate Milk: Budding Scholars Discuss Power” ....66

4

Ten-Page ArgumentsEmily Oshinskie ’14 “She’s on the Ball: I Love Lucy and the

1950s American Family Sitcom” ..............................................................69Rachel Masselle ’14 “Pirate Rulers: Machiavellian Strategy and the

Colonization of Tortuga” ..........................................................................75Skylar Clapperton ’14 “Not-So-Perfect: Examining Literary Utopias” .................80Margaret Feldman ’14 “Abigail Adams: Life, Legacy, and Lasting Impact” ..........85

Portfolio Reflective EssaysChristian Bruce ’14 “A Change of Heart” ............................................................92Caitlyn Bacon ’14 “Caitlyn Bacon: A Work in Progress” ....................................94

Encore Paper Zachary Barbour ’14 “The Power of Hard Work and Commitment” ..................97

1

Introduction

Welcome to this year’s volume of Selected Freshman Essays at Elmira College. The essays in this text are the product of the thoughts, interests, and hard work of the Class of 2014 taking Writing 1010 and Writing 1020 during Terms I and II. These essays attest to the growth of this class both as writers and as students, and they serve as evidence that the members of the Phenomenal Class of 2014 have bright futures ahead of them at Elmira College and beyond.

The focus for these students was to sharpen their skills to write intelligent-ly, effectively, and concisely. The skills of analytical writing demanded many hours of study and practice, not to mention considerable editing, rewriting, and rewriting again. Good writing, after all, is a process, and the rewards of all the patience and perseverance have been each writer’s improvement and increased confidence. The essayists in this volume have begun the journey to acquire the skills to meet any writing challenge, academic or professional.

The Lecturers in the Freshman Writing Program hope this fine collection will encourage more excellent writing this year. Who knows? Perhaps your essay will qualify to be included in next year’s volume!

The Term I Mark Twain Project: A Study of Tom Sawyer

The Mark Twain Project is an assignment that incoming students begin during the summer and complete by the end of the first week of Freshman Writing class. Elmira College enjoys a longstanding connection with Twain and his family, and this year’s discussion of Twain was particularly poignant for students due to the publication of the first volume of Twain’s autobiography as well as the contro-versial new edition of Huckleberry Finn. These two volumes reconfirmed Twain’s importance to mainstream culture, as stories about the texts appeared everywhere from CNN to the local news.

In honor of the Mark Twain tradition, students in the Freshman Writing Program began Term I by reading Tom Sawyer and responding to the text. They examined the book from a variety of perspectives to understand that it is much more than the children’s story they may already know. By responding to various prompts, one of which asked them to examine the accompanying original illustra-tions by True W. Williams, students came to understand the subtle complexity of the book. In the Mark Twain Project presented here, entitled “The Adventures of Mark Twain’s Characters,” Paige Kleinfelder ’14 focuses especially on the develop-ment and complexity of Tom’s character.

2

Twain Project Part I: The Summer Writing Assignment

Before arriving on campus for Fall Orientation, all members of the Class of 2014 were asked to complete their first assignment for the Freshman Writing Program by reading Mark Twain’s The Adventures of Tom Sawyer and then writing a paper with both a creative and analytical component. In the first part, the student was asked to create a fourth character who interacts with or becomes a member of the pirate gang described in Twain’s book; in the second part, the student was to comment on the community the children form.

In “The Tale of Johnny Butler,” her summer essay on Tom Sawyer, Paige Kleinfelder ’14 first creates an intriguing story in which she incorporates a fourth character, Johnny, who influences the boys to reconsider the meaning of home and family; then she offers skillful commentary on just how Johnny influenced the boys and what we learn about community both in Twain’s novel and in her own story. Paige’s paper illustrates that, even in their first assignments, members of the Phenomenal class possessed great promise both as talented creative writers and as analytical thinkers, skills that the students would continue to develop throughout both terms.

The Tale of Johnny Butlerby Paige Kleinfelder ’14

Part I: Narrative

“Who are you?” I asked. These were my first words to another person in three years.

Three laughing faces changed to bewilderment as they turned in my direc-tion. They looked at each other, but only one was able to summon the courage to speak.

Upon standing, the confident boy said, “I am Tom Sawyer, the Black Avenger of the Spanish Main. They is Huck Finn, the Red-Handed; and Joe Harp-er, the Terror of the Seas.”

The introduction seemed all that was going to be said by the boys, but sud-denly the most fearful looking boy, in torn clothes, blurted out:

“You’re Johnny Butler! But they said you got drownded.”“Well, I am not a ghost,” I spoke as I moved closer to the fire and was il-

luminated fully. The boys still stared at me unconvinced until the final boy, Joe, began to

laugh heartily and managed to say, “Of course he is not a ghost! He is standing in the light!”

“What’s that got to do with it?” Huck’s voice stuttered out the question. “It’s the light. He ain’t bothered by it. I heard it from Bob Tanner, who

was told by Jim Hollis, who actually sent the ghosts away. He was out in the grave-

3

yard that night with four ghosts comin’ towards him. But he sent ’em all away with a single candle flame.”

“That’s right,” I said, “which means I have been living here for the past three years.”

“So you are a pirate?” said Tom.“Well I used to be . . .” and I began to tell my story to the boys. Three years

ago, I lived in St. Petersburg, not but three houses down from Mr. Sprague. Things were fine, but I longed for an adventure on the water, going from place to place, and so I left. I lived here and there for a while, but ended up on this here island. I even confessed that sometimes I wish to go back to visit my mother and go to the places I used to play.

As I said these things, the boys looked back and forth at each other ner-vously. It was so quiet you could hear a cricket’s soft, humming chirp from across the water. Again it was Tom who was the first to speak up:

“We know your ma. See her all the time. She misses you something fierce.” A twitch rose across his face, but he continued by saying, “She mostly keeps to her-self, ’cept when she is talkin’ ’bout you. She shows your picture ’round a lot. Askin’ people where you got to, but of course no one knows and it been years. Crazy Ole Widow Butler is what she is known by now.”

A hush fell over the group. No one spoke the rest of the night, and eventu-ally we all drifted off to sleep.

***The next morning passed along with fishing and then breakfast. To amuse

ourselves, we all set out across the island; I showed them the secrets of the island, and we found new marvels in the forested ground covered in newly budding flow-ers.

It seemed that, as the afternoon dragged on, our spirits were all slumping. The expedition was called to an end in order to return to the beach for lunch. I stayed behind to gather my things along the island. On the way back to the camp, I heard the boys’ voices rising, and as I broke through the brush, it was Tom’s voice leading their conversation:

“Boys, I know who’s drownded: it’s us!” (Twain 111).They were ecstatic about being the lost boys, thought to be dead. They

had become heroes. During my years on the island, however, I had started to have my doubts about this sort of living. Now I began to think of the dreams of adven-ture, riches, fame, and companions that I once shared with the other boys. I had accomplished none of the things I set out for, so I began planning my exit from the island.

First I had to be sure that Tom, Joe, and Huck would keep my existence a secret.

“I can’t have anyone else know that I was on this island or that you boys saw me,” I said that night as we ate the fish we caught.

“Why sure. We can do that,” Tom said.“But we should make a written promise, with blood an’ all,” said Huck.

4

Tom wrote up the pact on a piece of sycamore bark, stating that the events of the pirate island adventures would be told without mention of Johnny. With Joe’s knife, we each took a turn pricking blood from our fingers and writing out our initials.

That night I went for a walk around the island, and, as I returned to the boys’ camp, I saw Tom leaving. I gathered my things and walked to the opposite side of the island and set out across the water. I was swimming away from the boys and what had been my home these past few years.

***A week later, I returned to the island to retrieve the things I had left. As

I swam to the edge of the island, I heard no sound of running or laughing. The island felt deserted, and I soon found that the boys were no longer there. I gathered my things and looked over the camp one last time. The only thing that remained of the island adventure was a pile of turtle egg shells, a few fish bones, and a piece of bark next to the burnt out fire that read, “Here on this island four pirates found treasure and glory. Together they lived and conquered the realm. They were The Black Avenger of the Spanish Main, The Red-Handed, The Terror of the Seas, and The Phantom Captain. Forever shall they be known.”

Part II: Analysis

Every action is influenced by the events that precede it. The Adventures of Tom Sawyer follows this natural law with the characters having consequences for their actions. In order to add to Mark Twain’s work effectively, it was necessary to insert actions that could have developed from Tom’s earlier decisions, such as his tendency to steal and go off on his own after dark. The inclusion of Johnny Butler leaves the final chapters of the story unaltered because he is present only on the island, and his involvement remains a secret to all who were not directly influenced by him. Johnny, a runaway, is the genuine pirate functioning outside the St. Pe-tersburg community because he is resistant to friendship and other relationships. However, Tom Sawyer and his friends create community through friendship.

The three boys originally written into the story—Tom Sawyer, Huck Finn, and Joe Harper—live on the island without any outside influence. With the addi-tion of Johnny, a boy only slightly older than the others, their adventure on the is-land is enhanced. Johnny Butler is adaptable to their way of living and shares many of the same aspirations, thus making his inclusion in the pirate band plausible. As a collective group, they have adventures similar to those in Twain’s novel. However, in the story here, Johnny’s life and stories become the driving force in Tom’s deci-sion to return home. Because of Johnny, the other boys realize what they have left at home. Unlike Johnny, the perpetual outsider, Tom and his friends develop a closer bond through their adventure, and this sense of community compels them to return to St. Petersburg.

The children in Twain’s novel have constructed their own community with idiosyncratic customs, history, and rules. These factors had to be incorporated into my retelling of the pirate band’s adventures on Jackson’s Island. The first event

5

including Johnny is the meeting, which invokes a superstition passed from boy to boy. Ghosts and spirits are a common point of discussion for the young boys of St. Petersburg, and this custom transfers to the island. The boys have a history of their own, made of stories and hearsay. The episode with the candle shows that certain superstitions have been passed from boy to boy for many years because Joe and Johnny know the same ghost lore. The children’s community has common customs and practices that even Johnny, once a member of the outside community and al-ways a member of the children’s community, understands, but ultimately he resists engaging with those practices because, as mentioned, since he has lived alone on the island for so many years, he has become the ultimate outsider who, though he recalls them, rejects the customs of community.

In their community, the children value possessions more than money. This is a trait Johnny shares with the other members of the pirate band. In St. Pe-tersburg, value placed on possessions is seen in the trade dealings between the boys: a yellow ticket for a fishing hook and a piece of licorice, a couple of white alleys for three red tickets, or a tooth for a tick (Twain 30, 52). On the island, the boys’ trinkets are prized and have special values to them. They are also important to the story, as shown by Tom and Johnny. Tom leaves all of his treasures behind when he makes his first trip home because he wants his friends to have them in case he does not make it back to the island. Similarly, Johnny’s belongings are so important to him that even though he leaves the island, he returns, a week later, to gather his things before moving on for good. The island invites new prized belongings, such as the corn cob pipes, fish, turtle eggs, and red chalk. Again, the children create community through a common love of trinkets, and this practice engages Johnny temporarily.

Practices and rules for the pirate band are not written down or created by any known person, but, instead, seem to be known inherently. The promise Johnny asks of the boys is one that cannot be taken lightly, so the boys make a written promise signed in blood. Because of it, not one of the boys is allowed to speak about Johnny being on the island. Reminiscent of the oath Tom and Huck make with one another in the graveyard, this becomes a very real rule for the boys, one that is to be upheld with seriousness (Twain 79-80). While there is a good deal of superstition involved in this oath, it demonstrates that the children’s community has rules as serious as those of the adults.

The influence the boys have on one another is heightened by the addition of Johnny Butler because he shows them the possible outcome of their adventure. Each of the boys is moved by the realization that, when Johnny went missing, his widowed mother never got over it and has gone insane with grief. This encourages their longing for home. Because of the silence following the conversations about Johnny’s mother and the boys’ pirating dreams, Johnny resolves to seek the life he set out for originally, trading in his past for a life of pirating. Because of this de-sire to remove himself and resist community with his new friends, he becomes the true pirate; the true pirate is not captivated by relationships or laws—even ones he understands—but rather seeks a life of freedom. Johnny proves that the other boys are simply play-pirates. He is the real one because real pirates resist community.

6

The inclusion of the fourth member to the pirate band encourages a deep-er consideration of the events on Jackson’s island and the resulting decisions the boys make to honor both their friendship and the greater community at large, in-cluding the adults of St. Petersburg. For a while, the island becomes a home for the boys separate from St. Petersburg and from the adult community. However, their ties to St. Petersburg make their stay temporary; unlike Johnny, they desire connec-tion both with each other and with the neighbors who love them.

Works CitedTwain, Mark. The Adventures of Tom Sawyer. Ed. Paul Baender. Berkeley: U of Cali-

fornia P, 1980. Print.

Twain Project Part II: Reputation Paper

The second assignment of the Mark Twain Project was the Reputation Paper. In this assignment, students were asked to examine if and how Tom’s repu-tation changes throughout the novel. In “Tom Sawyer’s Dual Reputations,” Paige examines how the adults in the novel come to see Tom as a hero.

Tom Sawyer’s Dual Reputationsby Paige Kleinfelder ’14

At the beginning of The Adventures of Tom Sawyer, Mark Twain reveals the two reputations Tom holds: the one he earns from his peers, and the other he earns from adults. However, only one of the reputations develops as the story progresses and Tom becomes involved in heroic events. Tom’s changing reputation with the adults is grounded in the actions that they consider heroic.

Twain describes Tom by the way his guardian, Aunt Polly, reacts to his behaviors. Tom is sly and will do whatever he can to get what he wants, whether it is jam, sugar, or the chance to prove he is tougher than another boy. Tom’s effect on Aunt Polly is shown when she speaks of being torn between loving the boy and disciplining him for bad behaviors:

He ’pears to know just how long he can torment me before I get my dander up, and he knows if he can make out to put me off for a minute or make me laugh, it’s all down again and I can’t hit him a lick. I ain’t doing my duty by that boy, and that’s the Lord’s truth, goodness knows. Spare the rod and spile the child, as the Good Book says. . . . He’s full of the Old Scratch, but laws-a-me! he’s my own dead sister’s boy, poor thing, and I ain’t got the heart to lash him, some-how. (2-3)

Like Aunt Polly, many of the adults witness Tom’s mischievous behavior but do not try to change it because they believe it is how all young boys act. Some believe that he should be punished for his devilish behaviors, but those attempts to im-

7

prove him are often thwarted. Tom is an active boy who adds fun and excitement to the other children’s lives. He earns his coveted reputation by having the best prized possessions, going on adventures, and supposedly having the best chores, like white-washing a fence. Tom’s friends admire his cunning, which the adults view as troublesome; this reputation is fortified by instances such as Tom’s obtaining a Bi-ble meant to be won by memorizing 2000 scriptural verses, but which Tom obtains simply by trading his trinkets for scripture tickets (Twain 34). In the beginning, Tom appears as a mischievous “bad” boy to both the adults and children.

Yet a series of Tom’s choices allow for the changes in perception that occur with his character by the end of the novel. The first event is his and his friends’ de-parture to and miraculous return from Jackson’s Island. The search for the missing boys and the belief that they may have perished encourages Tom’s aunt to remem-ber him in a way that does not reflect the disdain she once expressed for his mis-chievous ways. Aunt Polly speaks to Joe Harper’s mother fondly of Tom: “‘he warn’t bad, so to say—only mischeevous. Only just giddy, and harum-scarum, you know. He warn’t any more responsible than a colt. He never meant any harm, and he was the best-hearted boy that ever was’” (Twain 116). Aunt Polly reflects the change in the adults’ attitudes as she interprets Tom’s actions with more positivity than with her previous dread and befuddlement.

The second alteration of Tom’s reputation is brought on by events that lead to the death of Injun Joe, Becky Thatcher’s return to safety, and the acquisi-tion of the treasure from the cave. The first to change is Tom’s reputation as a valuable member of his community. The town rejoices at the safe return of Tom and Becky from McDougal’s cave after being lost for three days (Twain 234). It is Tom’s experience in the cave that alerts the town to Injun Joe’s entrapment within the cave. Tom’s actions, along with the warm welcome he and Huck receive from Widow Douglas, improves his reputation with the adults. This, in conjunction with the shocking sum of money he finds, causes the adults to look less critically on the devious acts he was known for and more at the prosperous boy whose cunning wit has rewarded him. Not to mention, he savors the fond attention he receives from the adult community; his tales are now backed up by proven skill, and Tom gladly recounts the delirious joy he and Becky felt when he finally found their escape: “She almost died for joy when she had groped to where she actually saw the blue speck of daylight . . . [we] sat there and cried for gladness” (235).

As Tom’s behaviors become more extravagant, the adults reevaluate his place in the community. Beginning as the mischievous boy who gets out of doing chores, Tom becomes an adventurer, hero, and treasure-finder. By the end of the novel, we see that the evolution of Tom Sawyer’s well-known reputation can be viewed as an adventure of its own.



8

Twain Project Part III: Illustration Paper

The Illustration Paper was the third assignment of the Mark Twain Proj-ect. In this paper, students were to examine how the initial illustrations in our edi-tion of Tom Sawyer impact the reader. In “Illustrated Descriptions,” Paige skillfully examines how the illustrations give us a truer picture of Tom than the words alone can. Particularly impressive in this paper is the manner in which Paige analyzes de-tails such as facial expressions to reveal how the illustrations add to Twain’s words to make the reading experience more enjoyable.

Illustrated Descriptionsby Paige Kleinfelder ’14

Neither a house, nor a boy, nor a cat, nor a question makes an event; these are all singular elements of a story and alone do very little. When numerous variables, such as location, time, participants, and verbal exchanges come together, it is the start of a story. However, one key element is often overlooked in many writ-ten narratives: a visual representation of facial cues and expressions that can enrich a story by giving information not provided in the dialog or descriptions. The first chapter of Mark Twain’s The Adventures of Tom Sawyer, with the original illustrations, gives the novel an advantage over other books because these drawings provide the reader with visual cues that add to the textual account.

“Tom!” Aunt Polly frantically calls out to Tom Sawyer in the first line of the book; although we read this in the text, it is the picture associated with her call that provides the initial view of Tom and the environment in which he lives (Twain 1). The illustration, “Tom at Home,” provides a view of his home, the street where he lives, and, most importantly, the character himself. Tom’s image in the illustra-tion coincides with Aunt Polly’s search in that it shows Tom with a carefree stance away from the house. His exact actions are not expressed, but we are given a glimpse of what is to be expected from the boy in the pages to come. Tom is a happy-go-lucky boy who does not always do what he is told.

The body language and facial expressions of the Tom Sawyer illustrations provide the information that would typically have to be gathered from reading be-tween the lines and attempting to visualize the scene. “Aunt Polly Beguiled,” the second illustration in the chapter, depicts the scene in the text when Aunt Polly “whirled around, and snatched her skirts out of danger. . . . [And Tom], on the in-stant, scrambled up the high board fence, and disappeared over it” (Twain 2). In the image, Tom is seen peering over his shoulder as he scales the very top of the fence. At the same time, Aunt Polly’s facial cues express the bafflement touched upon in the text. Her expression reveals the transition between her fear of what Tom could be up to and her realization that Tom has once again fooled her. In the illustration, her eyes are widened and her mouth transitioning from hanging open in a state of shock to frowning in disbelief that she has fallen for Tom’s trick.

9

Tom Sawyer is an expressive young boy whose thoughts are often outward-ly shown by his face and body, a fact made evident in the illustrations. For example, in “A Good Opportunity” (Twain 3), where he is seen glancing at Aunt Polly as he steals sugar, Tom’s eyes indicate that he knows what he is doing is wrong but he does it anyway, once again revealing his mischievous nature. Also, the confrontation that Twain describes between Tom and the “new-comer” boy shows that, although Tom is quite confident with people he knows, a new person makes him feel territorial and defensive (Twain 5). “Who’s Afraid,” the illustration of this scene (Twain 7), shows a great deal of facial expression, alerting the reader to the intensity that this confrontation holds for Tom. The profile view of the boys’ faces lets us see both of them at the same time, allowing us to feel their apprehension as the tension builds. The written dialog between them demonstrates the bulk of their conflict, but a comparison of their facial expressions in the illustration truly shows the differences between the boys. We see that, even though he is looking up to a boy superior in size and refinement, Tom’s eyes are wide and confident. Ultimately, even though he is the seemingly less dominant figure because of his stature, Tom comes across as the tougher character because his face is more grimaced.

The concluding illustration in chapter one is of Tom, viewed from behind, sneaking back into Aunt Polly’s house long after he should have arrived home. Un-like the other images, “Late Home” (Twain 9) does not show Tom’s face. Instead, we simply see him from outside the house as he climbs in the window. This shows that, unlike the time he went over the fence to get away from Aunt Polly and looked back over his shoulder, now he does not believe that anyone could possibly see or catch him, revealing his confidence in his sly behaviors. The illustration provides for a greater shock when Tom realizes that Aunt Polly has not watched him flee from her this time but is waiting for him. Perhaps the key to this illustration is its contrast with the others. Rather than revealing Tom’s personality through facial expressions, this illustration hides his face from the reader as he sneaks into the house, which emphasizes his tendency to be deceitful. He is trying to fool both Aunt Polly and the reader, but he is not successful.

The Adventures of Tom Sawyer takes advantage of visual information to add to Twain’s written words, providing the reader with body language and facial expres-sions that would otherwise be missing from the story. The illustrations of chapter one produce a familiarity to Tom and the people he encounters. Their silent body clues are visualized, so reading the novel becomes a more involved experience. By both imagining Tom and examining artistic interpretations of his behavior, the reader understands that his character is fueled by mischief, deceit, and defiance. The illustrations put a face on a troublesome boy.



10

Twain Project Part IV: Education Paper

The final assignment of the Term I Mark Twain Project asked students to examine Twain’s attitudes toward education as expressed through the novel. In “Education and Experience,” Paige does an excellent job of showing how, when read deeply, the novel demonstrates that Twain does not favor either formal or informal education but instead a combination of the two. Avoiding a simplistic argument, Paige uses excellent examples from the text and from outside sources to support her claims.

Education and Experienceby Paige Kleinfelder ’14

The main component of living is becoming better acquainted with the wisdom the world has to offer. The characters in The Adventures of Tom Sawyer are all influenced and changed by knowledge, no matter how it is gained. The novel’s 21st chapter brings education and wisdom to the forefront and shows by example what it means to learn. Twain uses Tom Sawyer’s failed recitation of Patrick Henry’s speech to reveal how the mechanical method of education directly contrasts Tom’s personal experiences, yet both are key factors in his learning.

Tom Sawyer’s schoolmaster is described as becoming “severer and more exacting than ever . . . [as] all the tyranny that was in him came to the surface” as ex-amination day approached (Twain 153). This is an example of traditional education in St. Petersburg. Through this example, Twain claims that education in St. Peters-burg is not based in experience, example, or trial and error, but is taught by means of memorization and strict rules. The children are required to participate in “ex-amination day” by choosing a piece of literature or composing their own piece that must be recited in front of an audience. Tom chooses to recite from memory Patrick Henry’s “Give me Liberty” speech. He “[steps] forward with conceited confidence and soar[s] into the unquenchable and indestructible, ‘Give me liberty or give me death’ speech, with fine fury and frantic gesticulation” (Twain 155). However, his attempt soon ends because he has forgotten the words that conclude the speech. To the schoolmaster, Tom’s unsuccessful recitation means that he has neither learned nor gained anything from his education.

In contrast to such a mechanical method of education, there are personal experiences that allow future decisions to be more informed. This form of educa-tion is the primary way Tom finds insight into how the world functions and how he should react to different people and situations. Tom is not concerned with written history, poetry, or compositions. Instead, throughout the book, we witness Tom’s ability to assess a situation and make the best choice to achieve his desired outcome, such as when he convinces his friends to white-wash the fence for him. Tom suc-ceeds in this case because of his deductive reasoning, not because of the traditional education he receives at school.

11

Twain provides two extremes of learning, one in education and one in experience. He does not approve singularly of one or the other, but expresses that a combination of the two must be sought in order to truly learn. While this overlap is not obvious on the surface of Tom’s education, small connections are made. For example, the speech Tom tries to deliver is about calling people together to fight a common enemy who has taken advantage of them. In the speech Tom chose, Patrick Henry says, “They tell us, sir, that we are weak; unable to cope with so formi-dable an adversary. But when shall we be stronger?” (Henry). In the same way, Tom gathers the boys together to embarrass the schoolmaster during the examinations. The boys set up an elaborate plan of lowering a cat to snatch the schoolmaster’s wig and reveal his painted bald head. Whether Tom realizes it or not, he uses the formal education he receives by means of Patrick Henry’s speech in a way that ap-plies to his own situation. Twain shows that Tom uses the knowledge he was taught formally, in combination with his previous experiences, to learn a new lesson: by putting the schoolmaster in an uncomfortable situation, Tom is able to eliminate his fear of the man.

Mark Twain’s famous words “I have never let my schooling interfere with my education” are echoed in The Adventures of Tom Sawyer. Twain’s lack of formal education beyond elementary school did not prevent him from learning and be-coming a knowledgeable man. By using Tom as an example, Twain shows that he sees great value in knowledge, but not if it is presented only through the mechani-cal method of formal education. Instead, Tom stands as a well-rounded boy, who, although he has benefited from it, is not restricted by traditional education. Tom takes everything he learns, whether from his adventures or formal lessons, and sub-consciously combines and uses it to his advantage.

Works CitedHenry, Patrick. “Give Me Liberty or Give Me Death.” 23 Mar. 1775. Archiving Early

America. Web. 10 Sept. 2010. Twain, Mark. The Adventures of Tom Sawyer. Ed. Paul Baender. Berkeley: U of Cali-


Term I Writing

In Term I, students learn traditional essay forms and argumentative strate-gies. In particular, they tackle the intricacies of the Toulmin model of warrant, claim, and evidence. As they acquire these argumentative skills, they also work to discover their own voices. The selections in this section demonstrate both the for-mal control and the richness of some of their efforts, and they illustrate just some of the styles and forms students practice in Term I, from short response papers to more traditional arguments and analyses.

The first two papers presented here are responses to the question of whether Herodotus or Thucydides is the better historian. In “Herodotus vs. Thucy-dides: Who is the Better Historian?” Becky Matturro ’14 argues that Thucydides is

12

superior because of his accuracy and first-hand accounts. In “Herodotus: The More Accessible Historian,” Taryn Rumsey ’14 takes the opposing view and argues that Herodotus is more accessible and enjoyable to read because of his story-like prose style.

Next are two argumentative essays on Herodotus’ Histories. Both papers ar-gue that King Leonidas made a wise and noble decision to take a stand at the pass at Thermopylae, but each does so using a different approach. In “Surrender is Not in a Spartan’s Vocabulary,” Elizabeth Forrest ’14 uses outside information to explore the historical and cultural motivations for Leonidas’ decision. Alternatively, in “A Spartan’s Decision,” Braiden Sorgenfrei ’14 focuses on Leonidas’ military strategy and how, because of Leonidas’ decisions, the battle served as a turning point in the Persian War.

Following these papers is a definition essay inspired by Cicero’s On the Good Life. Brayden Abbey ’14’s “Contemporary Friendship and Selflessness” uses Ehninger’s forms of definition to reveal how certain qualities of friendship remain constant while the definition also adapts to each generation.

The final paper in this section, “The Stoic Worldview of Marcus Aurelius” by Allison Nobles ’14, examines the philosophy behind the worldview of one of Rome’s renowned emperors.

Herodotus vs. Thucydides: Who is the Better Historian?by Becky Matturro ’14

Written by the man known as the “father of history,” Herodotus’ The Histories is the first prose telling of the Persian War (Blanco xi). Herodotus’ writing presents fanciful and dramatic qualities that resemble the styles of myth and epic poetry, and his extravagant description makes the history of the Persian War enjoy-able for his audience. On the other hand, Thucydides’ The History of the Peloponne-sian War is a more factual account of its respective war because the author does not saddle his text with flowery language. When determining which author is the better historian, it becomes evident that, even though Herodotus presents an entertaining style, Thucydides’ use of factual information and personal experience proves him to be the true historian.

Herodotus is not as legitimate a historian because his research relies on gossip and secondhand accounts (Blanco xii). His use of field research provides the reader with vivid and exciting stories instead of proven depictions of the war. For example, Herodotus’ use of hearsay results in exaggerated statistics about the num-ber of men each country had in the war. For the battles of Sepias and Thermopylae, Herodotus says that Xerxes “led five million two hundred eighty-three thousand two hundred and twenty men” (187). This astounding claim engages an audience but lacks accuracy, which is an essential trait for a true historian.

Unlike Herodotus in his discussion of the Persian War, Thucydides re-mains objective in his discussion of the Peloponnesian War. Instead of hearsay, he uses firsthand accounts of battles and speeches to validate his claims. One advan-

13

tage he has over Herodotus is his personal experience in the war. His time as a gen-eral authenticates his writing and provides him substantial firsthand evidence. This firsthand experience is enhanced by the fact that he also recounts events chrono-logically and includes a point of view from each side of the conflict, increasing his book’s objectivity.

Unlike Herodotus, Thucydides was not concerned with how interesting his writing was, but more so with how accurately he portrayed events. He makes his priorities apparent to the reader, professing that “the absences of romance in my history will, I fear, detract somewhat from its interest; but if it be judged useful by those inquirers who desire an exact knowledge of the past as an aid to the interpre-tation of the future . . . I shall be content. In fine, I have written my work, not as an essay which is to win the applause of the moment, but as a possession for all time” (Thucydides 10). Because Thucydides desired his work to be viewed as history in-stead of prose, he produced writing that is useful; compiling a work that is accurate is more culturally valuable than composing interesting prose, making Thucydides the true historian when compared to Herodotus.

Works CitedBlanco, Walter. Introduction. The Histories. By Herodotus. New York: Norton,

1992. xi-xiii. Print. Herodotus. The Histories. Trans. Walter Blanco. New York: Norton, 1992. Print. Thucydides. History of the Peloponnesian War. Trans. Richard Crawley. Mineola, NY:

Dover, 2004. Print.

Herodotus: The More Accessible Historianby Taryn Rumsey ’14

Greek historians Herodotus and Thucydides wrote their interpretations of the Persian and Peloponnesian Wars, respectively. In The Histories, Herodotus describes Greek culture and also gives his account of the Persian War. In The History of the Peloponnesian War, Thucydides focuses solely on the Peloponnesian War and discusses factual circumstances surrounding war, such as the chronology of events. While Thucydides is concerned with facts, Herodotus is more concerned with mak-ing his narrative engaging and accessible. As a result of his interest in storytelling, to the modern reader, Herodotus is the more understandable and, in turn, more influential historian of the two.

Unlike Thucydides’ chronicle of the Peloponnesian War, Herodotus’ ac-count of the Persian War is written in a manner that any reader can comprehend. He carefully details each person and location to help the reader understand where events occurred and with whom they occurred. For example, Herodotus describes King Leonidas, claiming, “Now, there were different commanders from the various cities, but the most admired was the Spartan commander in chief of the whole army [Leonidas]” (191). By giving the insight that Leonidas was a pivotal figure in this war, Herodotus makes his discussion about the man accessible and transpar-

14

ent. Honoring Leonidas also shows that Herodotus thought highly of him as the Spartan leader.

Another example of Herodotus’ storytelling occurs when he describes the battle between the Greeks and Persians at Thermopylae. He says:

Oh but the Lacedaemonians fought a battle to remember! Among these men who knew nothing of warfare, they showed in all sorts of ways that they really knew how to fight—like when they turned their backs and pretended to run away, the barbarians would see them running and would chase after them shouting and making noise, and then the Greeks would wheel around and face the barbarians just as they were about to be overtaken and slaughter countless numbers of them. (Herodotus 193)

This vivid description of the battle engages the reader and makes us want to contin-ue reading the story even if we are unfamiliar with the topic. Thus, Herodotus’ style makes him accessible, especially to the modern reader who wants a good story.

The clear and engaging way Herodotus presents his historical account of the Persian War is particularly useful to the novice reader. Those who know noth-ing of the war could make sense of it by reading his text. His careful explanations are appealing because they reveal history likely mysterious to a newcomer. While Herodotus may expose his personal points of view, this does not weaken his narra-tive. Instead, it reveals that he cares about engaging his readers rather than simply presenting them with unexplained facts, making him the more influential historian.

Works CitedHerodotus. The Histories. Trans. Walter Blanco. New York: Norton, 1992. Print. Thucydides. History of the Peloponnesian War. Trans. Richard Crawley. Mineola, NY:

Dover, 2004. Print.

Surrender is Not in a Spartan’s Vocabularyby Elizabeth Forrest ’14

Without hesitation, they shadowed him. Three hundred of the strongest and most honorable men of Sparta, specially trained for the most grueling battles since boyhood, followed their king to their imminent deaths. In Herodotus’ Histo-ries, Book 7 delves into the story of King Leonidas’ stand at Thermopylae against the million-manned Persian army led by Xerxes. Many argue against the sacrificial death of Leonidas and his three hundred men, believing it to leave Sparta’s future in the unsteady hands of an oracle. However, Leonidas’ decision to fight the battle was wise not only to protect his people and country from Persian slaughter, but also to illustrate his men’s honor in fulfilling their mission to guard the post and remain true to their reputations as Spartan warriors.

By making a stand at Thermopylae, Leonidas and his three hundred men faced the Persian army, whose numbers greatly outweighed their own. Because of this, critics argue, Leonidas’ decision was foolish, as Leonidas and his men walked

15

willingly to their deaths. However, their stand proved their bravery and strength, which were important qualities to the Spartans. Leonidas and his three hundred Spartans were the strongest men to fight on European soil. Knowing this, Demara-tus, Xerxes’ advisor, informed Xerxes of the Spartans’ power, telling him “if you defeat these men . . . there are no other people on earth who will take up arms against you . . . you are about to face the noblest king and the bravest men in all of Greece” (Herodotus 192). Even the opposition recognized that the Spartans were strong and brave, and the fact that they fought in spite of the numbers and in spite of certain death reinforced this fact.

Those who oppose Leonidas’ decision believe that the deaths of three hundred of the greatest combatants known to Europe left Sparta vulnerable against Xerxes’ men, therefore making Leonidas’ sacrifice useless to the overall protection of his country. Critics argue that Leonidas sacrificed himself and his men only to promote his own legend rather than to protect his nation. But how can one be remembered if all of his people are terminated? The end of Sparta would mean the end of Leonidas’ name. Therefore, this argument that Leonidas fought only for fame seems weak. Instead, trusting in the oracle, which will be discussed shortly, Leonidas decided to make a stand at Thermopylae as a means of protecting his fel-low Spartans from Persian slaughter.

By taking a stand, Leonidas was fulfilling his duty. As king of Sparta, Le-onidas had a duty to protect his lands and people by any means necessary. Along with his fathers before him, Leonidas helped build the Spartan Empire, which spe-cialized in the training of soldiers. Now, as king, he was responsible for securing Sparta’s posterity. Knowing the Persian army outweighed his, Leonidas went to the Pythian priestess to confer about the upcoming battle. She proclaimed to Leonidas that either his “Lacedaemonian people would be uprooted by the barbarians or [he] would die” (Herodotus 195). Out of pride for himself and his nation, Leonidas went willingly, with his three hundred men, to guard their post at Thermopylae. He knew that he must die to ensure that Sparta live on, and he accepted that fact. Leonidas did what he believed was necessary to protect Sparta and its reputation as a strong, independent nation within Greece. Critics argue that the wisest decision for Leonidas would have been to retreat, but, as a proud warrior and a king, Leoni-das would rather die carrying out an impossible mission than return home shaming himself and the Spartan nation.

If one were unfamiliar with Spartan ideals, it would be easy to criticize Le-onidas’ decision. However, Spartans firmly believed that “if they could not defend their city with the strength of their army, and not stone walls, they did not deserve to be free” (Stewart). With this mindset, retreating was not an option for Leonidas or his men. They had a mission to protect the gates at Thermopylae against the Persian Empire, and they were determined and honor-bound to fulfill that mission. Xerxes had an intimidating number of men compared to Leonidas’ small troop, but Herodotus noted Xerxes possessed very “few real men” (Herodotus 193). Alter-natively, Leonidas’ army had three hundred men ready to die with valor for Sparta. By making a stand at Thermopylae, the Spartans acted as a stone wall, blocking the

16

Persians from advancing. Although they were slaughtered on Xerxes’ direct com-mand, the Spartans died upholding the honor their culture valued so highly.

Overall, although many argue against his decision, Leonidas was wise to make a stand at Thermopylae. The act protected his people from Persian slaughter and proved his men’s honor. Because the king is the ultimate example of a na-tion’s values, Leonidas had no other option than to make a stand at Thermopylae. Therefore, according to his own culture’s values, his decision was wise. He and his warriors died with honor and for a cause, resulting in Sparta’s continued freedom. The legend of Leonidas and his army served as an inspiration to the Spartan people and to all warriors for centuries to come.

Works CitedHerodotus. The Histories. Trans. Walter Blanco. New York: Norton, 1992. Print.Stewart, Michael. “People, Places & Things: Sparta.” Greek Mythology: From the Iliad

to the Fall of the Last Tyrant. Messagenet Communications Research, 2005. Web. 19 Sept. 2010.

A Spartan’s Decisionby Braiden Sorgenfrei ’14

At the battle of Thermopylae, the Greeks, numbering in the mere hun-dreds, stood and died to defend their land from a Persian army of millions. The leader of the Greeks, Spartan King Leonidas, has often come under question for the legitimacy of his orders to stay and fight in the face of desperate odds. Many believe his decision was unwise. However, from a strictly strategic perspective, his decision to fight at Thermolylae was wise for two main reasons. First, the location was strategic, illustrating Leonidas’ skill as a tactician; and, second, by staying to fight, the Spartan soldiers bought time for the rest of Greece to unite and gather their forces for a large-scale battle against the Persians. Therefore, the battle proved a turning point in the war with Persia.

The strategic planning that Leonidas put into the battle of Thermopylae was brilliant. Thermopylae was the only way into central Greece (Herodotus 184). To the west of the Thermopylae entrance was a large mountain that was impassable, and to the east was marsh-like terrain (Herodotus 184). These two barriers acted as walls, gradually narrowing the pass into a small ravine. This funnel-like defense made the pass only fifty feet wide at its smallest point (Herodotus 184). The deci-sion to have the battle there was wise because, by doing battle at the narrowest part of the pass, Leonidas removed the Persians’ advantage of numbers by forcing them into a choke point (Herodotus 185). The only downfall to this plan was the small pass that ran through the mountains around Thermopylae and acted as a flank path for the Persians. The Greeks did not discover this path until they arrived at Thermopylae, and then they did their best to protect the hidden path by position-ing 1,000 guards at its location (Herodotus 184). Overall, however, the battle plan

17

for the Greeks was strategically anticipated, and Leonidas’ choice to fight there demonstrates that he was a brilliant and brave strategist.

Despite the advantage Leonidas gave his side, many historians have ques-tioned the reasoning for Leonidas’ actions in the first place. Why would he try to fight so many men with so few? Some claim Leonidas was attempting to buy time for the rest of Greece to gather up their full forces to stand against the Persians (Herodotus 192). This is another reason why Leonidas’ decision was wise. In spite of the fact that he knew he was outnumbered and that he would lose the battle, Le-onidas slowed his enemy by fighting at Thermopylae. In total, the Spartans’ actions obstructed the progression of the Persians for almost an entire week. This time was crucial to the rest of Greece because it allowed the rest of the Olympic Games to be carried out (Herodotus 192). After the games ended, Greece was able to assemble its soldiers and form an army to stand against the Persian force. By choosing to stay and fight, the Spartans became the saviors of Greece (Herodotus 178). Their story of courage spread and gave a morale boost to all Greeks who fought after the battle at Thermopylae. Ultimately, the battle proved to be the turning point in the war with the Persians, and, although the Spartans lost this battle, their willingness to fight it eventually allowed the Greeks to achieve victory in the war.

In the end, despite the criticism he has faced for his actions, Leonidas’ de-cision to stay and fight at Thermopylae was wise because it demonstrated his skill as a strategist and because it bought time for the rest of Greece to gather forces to fight the Persians, which ultimately allowed Greece to win the war. As a result, Leonidas is remembered as a brave king who sacrificed himself and his faithful warriors for the greater good of his people. To a valiant warrior, there is no decision more wise than this.

Works CitedHerodotus. The Histories. Trans. Walter Blanco. New York: Norton, 1992. Print.

Contemporary Friendship and Selflessnessby Brayden Abbey ’14

The desire for friendship is a natural part of human nature. Every human has physiological needs that must be satisfied in order to survive, and likewise hu-mans have emotional needs that must be met. Cicero claims a true friend will do everything in his or her power to help another friend in need: “That is to say, you ought to give each of your friends just as much assistance as you have the capacity to provide—and as the object of your affection and assistance is capable of receiving” (213). Friendship is a mutual desire between two individuals to help and care for one another to the best of their abilities, and it provides a unique bond between two people centered on trust and respect. True friendship should never waiver, even in the worst of times. Through work and dedication, friendship can provide two individuals with a bond that is unlike any other force in the universe.

18

Friendship is the term used to describe the bond between two individuals; the root word for “friendship” is “friend,” a term that was adopted into the English language hundreds of years ago and which originally derived from various dialects of old Germanic languages. The ancient German word was “freond,” which was a form of a German verb meaning to love someone or something. The stem or root of that word, “fri,” is also found in German culture as the name of an ancient Ger-man goddess, Frigg, the goddess of love. Since becoming a regularly used word in the English language, “friend” has not lost its meaning. It is continually used in English to describe a positive relationship between two individuals centered on love (Scott).

In today’s society, the word “friend” has acquired additional meanings. Today’s world offers a variety of friendships. Genuine friendship still exists, but there are now different types of friendship, and the term “friend” is often used very loosely. A friend can now be described as someone who sends an Internet request on a social networking website, or a friend can be a person who just moved into your dormitory. These definitions clearly lack the strong emotional bond on which traditional friendship is built, as many people will have a new “BFF” (“Best Friend Forever”) every day of the week. Yet, in today’s society, true friendship is still possible. Now more than ever, human beings are poised to better communicate with one another through an assembly of technologies. Having a friendship with someone who lives across the world is very common today because of email, social networks, and face-to-face video chat. If nurtured, such friendships can form into the type of bond Cicero described.

The qualities of true friendship are also evident in many modern mar-riages because the bond between spouses is centered on love, respect, and compas-sion, which are essential building blocks to any successful relationship. Many of the activities involved in marriage display the actions of a healthy friendship. For example, caring for the other through sickness and health coincides with the fun-damental principle of remaining a friend through the best of times and worst of times. Vowing to be honest with one another is an essential component of any mar-riage, just as it is to any friendship. Honesty is a crucial part of communicating with your friend. If each member of a friendship is consistently honest with the other, establishing trust comes naturally. This trust can grow with time and prove to be one of the foundations of a friendship. Respect for the other person is imperative in order to establish a healthy balance in any relationship. Contemporary marriage allows for this kind of relationship because of its emphasis on the equality of its partners; equal spouses are more likely to be friends. Furthermore, a long-lasting, healthy friendship could eventually blossom into a happy marriage between two best friends.

A close friendship with someone can also be a source of inspiration. In times of great desperation and need, a person often turns to his closest friends for support and motivation. Because of the familiarity friends share, they are often best to turn to for help; friends offer comfort and security because a true friend will make himself or herself approachable while ensuring confidentiality. When dealing with stress or trauma, having a trusted friend can be an invaluable resource for cop-

19

ing. A healthy friendship can also provide a valuable learning experience for the two friends. Friendships teach important life skills such as honesty, respect, and compas-sion. These skills are crucial and become fine-tuned and perfected with time.

All in all, friendship is essential to human beings. The ties created around love, trust, and respect provide the emotional satisfaction humans desire. Main-taining friendships provides experience and knowledge that is useful in day to day interactions with people. These healthy friendships also provide resources for each member in the friendship, especially in times of need. Friendship takes work to maintain, and not all friendships will last forever. However, if the work is put into the relationship, then the rewards will be worth the effort, proving that Cicero’s ideas on friendship remain true in the modern era.

Works CitedCicero, Marcus Tullius. On the Good Life. Trans. Michael Grant. New York: Pen-

guin, 1971. Print.Scott, Edurne. “The Origin of the Word Friend: How Friend Entered the English

Language.” Suite101.com: Online Magazine and Writers’ Network. Suite101.com Media, Inc., 20 Dec. 2008. Web. 02 Feb. 2011.

The Stoic Worldview of Marcus Aureliusby Allison Nobles ’14

Stoicism, as described by A. A. Long, was the “most important and in-fluential development in Hellenistic philosophy” (107). It was a moral philosophy based on the idea that the universe is a rational structure and the belief that one’s goal in life should be to live harmoniously with it (Long 118). Roman Emperor Marcus Aurelius became a committed Stoic by age twenty-five and continued the practice of Stoic morals until his death in 189 C.E. He wrote about the application of these morals in his Meditations, which he originally titled “To Himself” (Kauf-man viii-ix). Though many factors were at play in the formation of the Emperor’s beliefs, Marcus Aurelius’ worldview was primarily based on concepts rooted in Stoic philosophy.

One of Aurelius’ fundamental beliefs was that “the universe” controlled occurrences on Earth (a basic tenet of Stoic philosophy). He believed that the universe was perfect, and, therefore, everything that happened occurred justly. In conjunction with the common Stoic view, Aurelius also believed he must strive to live harmoniously with nature, based on the universe’s will, claiming, “Everything harmonizes with me, which is harmonious to you, O Universe. For me, nothing is too early or too late if it is in due time for you. Everything is fruit to me that your seasons bring, O Nature: from you are all things, in you are all things, to you all things return” (23). In this passage, Aurelius illustrates a cycle in which nature pro-vides, contains, and has a place for everything on Earth. Later in his work, Aurelius urges himself to remember that the universe is a single, unified structure, possessing a single soul. He notes that the endless motion of the universe is comparable to “the

20

continuous spinning of the thread” (25). This order is another basic idea of Stoic philosophy.

Even though Aurelius believed that the universe was in control, he under-stood that a person’s interaction with the universe is based on choice. He realized that human beings are not perfect like the universe, but they do have control over their own decisions, and he assessed that the most basic choice a person can make is to do good acts throughout his or her life (8). This was also the most correct choice, in Aurelius’ opinion. He noted that though he may encounter imperfec-tions throughout the day, the decision to let those instances influence his path toward goodness was his alone. Aurelius showed this concept of choice by sug-gesting a way of thought that corresponds to the ability to make choices: “Begin the morning by saying to yourself, I shall meet with the busybody, the ungrateful, arrogant, deceitful, envious, unsocial . . . . But I, who have seen the nature of the good that is beautiful, and of the bad that is ugly . . . can neither be injured by any of them” (8). Aurelius reinforces the concept that the choice to live well is one that everyone is given, and everyone has the opportunity to decide to participate in good deeds, even when encountering others who choose not to. Furthermore, Aurelius thought that once a person had done a good deed, he or she should simply go on to do another deed rather than tell everyone about his or her first good deed. A true Stoic, he believed that a good man does not need the personal satisfaction he might receive from telling others about his act of goodness.

Aurelius’ belief in doing good deeds also relates to his views about death and dying. He believed that, since death is inevitable, one must live his or her life accordingly. Most notably, he wrote, “Do not act as if you were going to live ten thousand years . . . . While you live, while it is in your power, be good” (22). Aure-lius believed that a person’s time on Earth is miniscule compared to the longevity of the universe. He compares time to a river, saying that the moment something happens, the current will quickly take it away and something else will replace it (25-26). Therefore, individuals and everything else the human observes, including other humans, are ultimately useless because they will eventually be destroyed and forgotten (73). However, he presents death as a product of nature and claims that, for this reason, it should not be feared. The Stoic in him took comfort in the fact that death is natural.

Ultimately, Marcus Aurelius encourages a worldview of self-reliance, hu-mility, and good works. Like many other Stoic philosophers, Aurelius believed that the universe was in control of the world, and that humans should live harmoni-ously with the universe. To Aurelius, everything that was natural was not to be feared, and it is for this reason that, even with a multitude of other belief systems in existence, Stoicism transformed Aurelius, and his writing continues to transform readers today.

Works CitedAurelius, Marcus. Meditations. Ed. William Kaufman. Mineola, NY: Dover, 1997.

Print.

21

Kaufman, William. Introduction. Meditations. By Marcus Aurelius. Mineola, NY: Dover, 1997. v-ix. Print.

Long, A. A. Hellenistic Philosophy. New York: Charles Scribner’s Sons, 1974. Print.

Constitution Day Essay Contest Winner

In celebration of Constitution Day, September 17, 2010, all members of the class of 2014 read the U.S. Constitution and wrote a paper considering the validity of one of several proposed amendments. Discussions were held in each writing class in honor of Constitution Day, and the papers were submitted for judg-ing. Here we honor Morgan Kilcullen ’14, whose paper “Mandatory Service: Never a Good Idea” received the prize for this year’s competition. In this paper, Morgan uses research and sound argumentative strategies to establish that a required three year service amendment would be unconstitutional and ineffective.

Mandatory Service: Never a Good Ideaby Morgan Kilcullen ’14

Our Founding Fathers understood that society changes over time. It is for this reason that they included in the original seven articles of the Constitution a process to change it. This process, found in Article V, has been completed only twenty-seven times since the Constitution’s framing. Although other amendments to the Constitution have been proposed, few have been ratified because the process requires passage not only by the House and Senate, but also by the individual states (Ginsberg and Ackerman 27). The ratification requirement provides checks and balances between the national government and states to ensure that the decision of whether or not to include a proposed amendment is fair and constitutional. Such a process is vital to our democracy, as it not only prevents the passage of unjust laws, but it also opens up issues for debate. Now, imagine that a committee proposed the following amendment: “Every citizen of the United States must serve a minimum of three years in the armed forces of the United States of America. A citizen’s failure to serve is punishable by federal law.” After deliberation, it becomes evident that this amendment should not be ratified because requiring citizens to perform man-datory military service is not only unconstitutional, but ultimately ineffective.

The first constitutionality issue for mandatory military service can be found in the Preamble of the Constitution. The Preamble begins by establishing the purpose and principles of the United States government. The framers write, “We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, . . . and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Poster-ity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America” (qtd. in Ginsberg and Ackerman 4). By including the term “Blessings of Liberty,” the Founding Fathers make it clear that the United States should be a place where citizens have the right to do, think, and speak as they choose. The Founding Fathers

22

considered the idea of personal liberty so important that they included it in the very first words of the Constitution. Therefore, denying one’s liberty by requiring him or her to perform mandated service is inherently wrong.

The issue of enforcing the proposed amendment is further complicated by religion. When religion comes into play, a dangerous situation erupts. Some reli-gions are against war, such as the Society of Friends (Quakers), the Dukhobors, and Jehovah’s Witnesses (“Conscientious Objector”). Since the proposed amendment would require all citizens to participate or be punished by law, those who practice pacifist religions and are religiously obligated not to participate would, in effect, be punished for their religion. This directly violates the First Amendment, which states that “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof” (qtd. in Ginsberg and Ackerman 33). In their explanation of this amendment, Ginsberg and Ackerman comment, “most Americans view these protections [the freedoms expressed in the first amendment] as fundamental to a free society” (33). By punishing those whose beliefs clash with the proposed military service requirement, the United States would, in fact, be making a “law respecting an establishment of religion.” This obviously goes against the protections granted by the First Amendment, which is an amendment so fun-damental that, as history tells us, many states would not have passed the original Constitution without it.

Amendment XIII of the U.S. Constitution states: “Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude . . . shall exist in the United States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction” (qtd. in Ginsberg an Ackerman 42). The proposed mandatory service amendment would directly violate Amendment XIII because forcing all citi-zens to join the military regardless of personal desire is, in fact, forcing them into involuntary servitude. Although the Thirteenth Amendment was originally passed in the context of slavery, the words may apply to any type of involuntary servitude. Mandatory military service may be considered as such because, once a citizen does not have the right to make his or her own decision (in this case concerning military service), he or she is in servitude to the person or entity that makes the decisions. Whether the person is treated poorly or treated well is irrelevant; as long as the person cannot voluntarily leave the arrangement at any time, he or she can be considered as being in involuntary servitude. By considering these facts, one can see that mandatory military service is indeed a form of involuntary servitude and is surely unconstitutional due to the Thirteenth Amendment.

In addition to being unconstitutional, adopting mandatory military ser-vice in our country would also ultimately be ineffective. As Jacob Weisberg, author of the article “A Slight Draft,” notes, “volunteers suffer fewer morale and discipline problems than those pressed into service involuntarily. They’re a better army” (12). With the proposed amendment’s hint of harsh punishment, it is likely that many citizens who would not otherwise volunteer would rather fulfill their service re-quirement than face the consequences, which could result either in resentful citi-zens joining but not giving their best effort or acting out against the service and requiring discipline. This is why our nation’s well-being should be left in the hands of those who will put forth only their best effort — those who volunteer to serve.

23

Opposition and resistance movements to mandatory service could impact the services’ effectiveness. An instance of this has already been seen in our nation during the Vietnam War, when a draft was instated. With rising draft calls and ca-sualties overseas, Americans such as “students, pacifists, clergy, civil rights and femi-nist organizations, and many other liberal and radical groups” became more and more opposed to required service (“Conscription”). These citizens demonstrated their oppositions to the draft by burning draft cards, staging sit-ins, and destroying draft board records. The federal government spent time indicting, convicting, and even imprisoning some of the offenders. This lowered the effectiveness of the draft program by forcing the government to devote attention to punishing those who opposed the draft instead of focusing its full attention on attaining and training its conscriptees.

One of the most common techniques of draft opposition during the Viet-nam War was evasion, and the numbers who evaded and were exempted were quite large: “Of the 26.8 million young men who reached draft age between 1964 and 1973, 16 million (60 percent) did not serve in the military. Of those who avoided service, 15.4 million received legal exemptions or deferments, and perhaps 570,000 evaded the draft illegally” (“Conscription”). If the proposed amendment were rati-fied, it is likely that we would see such numbers again. By avoiding military service, whether legally or illegally, citizens lower the size of the army and force the govern-ment to use its resources not to strengthen the military but to manage exemptions, deferments, and draft deserters.

Mandatory military service programs also do not provide enough training for conscriptees. In his article “Mandatory Military Service,” Armstrong Williams explains the ineffectiveness of conscript training: “because of time and resource constraints, many mandatory military service opponents point out that conscripts usually only receive rudimentary training, which can cause bloodshed during hos-tile situations” (13). By not providing citizens enough training to fight properly, mandatory service programs not only make themselves ineffective, but they also do their citizens a disservice by failing to give them the training needed to protect themselves in battle. Without proper training, conscripted citizens cannot be ex-pected to fight effectively. This lowers the effectiveness not only of the conscripted citizens, but also of the whole group because those who are trained well are forced to correct mistakes made by those with rudimentary training. Lack of proper train-ing causes conscripted armies to become ineffective, which would lead to longer wars and further bloodshed.

Our Founding Fathers created checks and balances in government to pre-vent unpopular programs from passing into law without the public’s approval. The draft used during the Vietnam War was obviously unpopular because citizens used many methods to oppose it, indicating that many citizens do not favor mandatory military service. Not only would a mandatory military service amendment be un-popular today, but it would also be both unconstitutional and ineffective. Propo-nents of instating a mandatory service program, such as Weisberg, may argue that it would solve the problem of “disproportional class representation” in the military (13). However, members of the upper-class could easily find exemptions from par-

24

ticipating in the service, such as the student exemptions used in the Vietnam War (Weisberg 13). Ultimately, because it would be both unconstitutional and ineffec-tive, the proposed military service amendment should not be passed into law.

Works Cited“Conscientious Objector.” The Columbia Encyclopedia. New York: Columbia UP,

2008. Credo Reference. Web. 16 Sept. 2010. “Conscription.” The Reader’s Companion to American History. Boston: Houghton Mif-

flin, 1991. Credo Reference. Web. 16 Sept. 2010.Ginsberg, Benjamin and Erin Ackerman. A Guide to the United States Constitution.

New York: Norton, 2007. Print.Weisberg, Jacob. “A Slight Draft.” New Republic 204.10 (1991): 12-14. Academic

Search Complete. Web. 16 Sept. 2010.Williams, Armstrong. “Mandatory Military Service.” New York Amsterdam News

97.26 (2006): 13. Academic Search Complete. Web. 15 Sept. 2010.

Twenty-Page Research Paper

The twenty-page paper is the major project of Term I, and it requires many hours of research, writing, and rewriting. For this paper, students are asked to select for their topic a subject related to the readings or issues discussed in class through-out the term. Ultimately, the paper demonstrates the student’s ability to persevere and to present a clear and compelling well-researched argument while preparing the student to face future writing challenges. The paper presented here does just that. In “The Power of Speech and Reason: The Enduring Importance of Rhetoric,” Samuel Pine ’14 walks his reader through the history of rhetoric, concentrating on Aristotle and how his theories extend into the present day. An especially intriguing aspect of Sam’s paper is his argument that rhetoric texts are and always have been self-help manuals.

The Power of Speech and Reason: The Enduring Importance of Rhetoric by Samuel Pine ’14

Outline: The Power of Speech and Reason: The Enduring Importance of Rhetoric

Thesis: As modern humans, we are almost always surrounded by others. In order to make the most of our endeavors, it is necessary for even the least ambitious person to learn some form of rhetoric. Without any knowledge of how to form a persuasive argument, daily life would be exceptionally difficult.

What did Aristotle contribute to the study of rhetoric?I. According to Aristotle, is rhetoric itself either good or evil?II. Is persuasion a skill or the result of flattery?III.

25

What role does the audience play in persuasive argument?IV. What are some ways in which rhetoric can be used for honest V. reasons? How can it be used for malevolent reasons?VI. What did Cicero contribute to the study of rhetoric?VII. According to Cicero, why must a rhetorician be moral?VIII. What happened with rhetoric during the Middle Ages?IX. What happened with rhetoric during the Renaissance?X. How have modern scholars contributed to rhetoric?XI. How is rhetoric still used today?XII.

Paper: The Power of Speech and Reason: The Enduring Importance of Rhetoric

The art of persuasion is possibly the best tool a person can have in any social setting, and, in the modern world, it is difficult to find a location that is not a social setting. Think about a typical day in an American’s life: after waking up, he drives himself to work on a public street. On the way there, he might stop for breakfast in a crowded coffee shop or stop at the bank to make a deposit. When he reaches his workplace, he wades through a hallway filled with co-workers, perhaps stopping to say hello to a few of them. His desk is stacked high with paperwork he should have filed the day before. As he picks up the phone to call his first potential customer of the day, he takes a few seconds to recall his script. The script makes a decent argument, but only rookies stick to the script when they are really trying to convince a customer to buy. As a seasoned veteran, the man in our scenario knows how to play off a customer’s background and persuade him or her to buy. He al-ways chooses a solid argument, but he is careful to cater to the customer. An older woman may respond to the good cause behind his company’s sales pitch; a young man may buy his product because of its efficiency and usefulness. After a long day of lucrative persuasion, the man returns home along the same busy road to spend the rest of the night at home with his family. The gist of this short narrative is that, as modern humans, we are almost always surrounded by others. In order to make the most of our endeavors, it is necessary for even the least ambitious person to learn some form of rhetoric. Without any knowledge of how to form a persuasive argument, daily life would be exceptionally difficult.

Persuasiveness is a trait that is popular among fictional characters. While most often a villain will exhibit persuasiveness, there are a few shining examples of a hero using rhetoric to better his cause. For example, American author Mark Twain (1835-1910) presents a scene in his book The Adventures of Tom Sawyer that depicts Tom, the hero, convincing his classmates that whitewashing a fence is fun. Tom is famous for his laziness, but he has a way with words, as he skillfully persuades his friends that his work is actually very enjoyable. He so successfully argues this, in fact, that a large number of his friends actually pay him for the chance to whitewash the fence (Twain 13-15). One wonders how a person could be so persuasive that he

26

completely distorts another’s beliefs on a subject. This sort of morbid fascination is part of the allure of rhetoric. Each piece of evidence means little by itself; sentences have only potential until they are glued together by logical reasoning. Somehow, the arrangement and tone of an argument can sew the various truths inherent to a topic into a cohesive whole capable of altering another person’s opinion. In other words, the whole is more than the sum of its parts.

Do not surmise from these hypothetical situations, however, that the use of rhetoric is either a recent discovery or a malevolent one. The idea of forming a persuasive argument existed long before either The Adventures of Tom Sawyer or the hypothetical situation above were even conceived. As Alan Axelrod says, “the ancient Greeks were the first to make conscious, deliberate use of rhetoric . . . . So much is evident from the epics of Homer, which were probably composed during the eighth or ninth century B.C., or the works of the great Greek dramatists such as Sophocles, or the writings of the earliest historians, Herodotus and Thucydides, all active during the fifth century B.C.” (6). One of the most famous students of rhetoric, Aristotle (384 BC - 322 BC), published a book titled simply Rhetoric. In it, he analyzes the structure of persuasive argument and also discusses the nature of rhetoric, contending that rhetoric is neither good nor evil: “Its possible abuse is no argument against its proper use on the side of truth and justice. The honest rhetori-cian has no separate name to distinguish him from the dishonest” (Aristotle vii). Rhetoric is a tool; the tool is not intrinsically good or evil, but it can be used for a good purpose or an evil one.

As mentioned, however, rhetoric existed even before Aristotle formally analyzed the structure of a persuasive argument. In works older than Rhetoric, we find examples of persuasive speeches and narrations that follow the familiar format of an argument. For example, Thucydides (c. 460 BC - c. 395 BC) includes a series of monologues in The History of the Peloponnesian War so the reader can gain a sense of each polis’ opinion and motives. In The Histories, Herodotus (c. 480 BC - c. 425 BC) includes a variety of opinions for each major topic; he writes these opinions in a persuasive manner to engage the reader and exhibit the finer points of each argu-ment. These examples illustrate that, even before rhetoric was broken down and codified by Aristotle, the ancient Greeks used it as an effective tool, illustrating that rhetoric is a natural and enduring aspect of the human experience.

Though Aristotle was not the first to use rhetoric, he did lay down a se-ries of principles that have transcended the ages and are still valid today. If one strips away the glorification the modern reader bestows upon Aristotle’s work for its long history, he would notice that Rhetoric is the equivalent to a modern day self-improvement book. We discover within its pages ideas and concepts people already know and use; it is in the telling and writing it down that the work becomes most important.

In keeping with good rhetorical form, Aristotle first gives a brief introduc-tion of his topic. In this introduction, he defines rhetoric as “the faculty of viewing in any given case the available means of persuasion” (Aristotle 6). This definition encompasses every form of organized argument, including speeches and essays. Rather than viewing rhetoric in a broad sense, Aristotle breaks it into a series of

27

categories. Rhetoric is able to persuade in three separate ways: “the first depends on the personal character of the speaker; the second on putting the audience into a certain frame of mind; the third on the proof, or apparent proof, provided by the speech itself” (Aristotle 7). These methods of persuasion are all applied based on the makeup of an audience. Aristotle also differentiates between arguments ac-cording to their application. A speech persuading one to take an action would be considered political rhetoric; an argument defending or prosecuting someone is considered forensic rhetoric, and “ceremonial oratory of display either praises or censures somebody” (Aristotle 13). After defining the term “rhetoric,” Aristotle pro-ceeds to give instruction on the finer points of rhetoric. For each type of persuasive argument, Aristotle coaches the reader on how to acquire the skills and knowledge necessary to create an influential work.

Aristotle contends throughout his book that persuasion is an acquired skill and a tool to be used; it is not simply the result of flattery. This may come as some surprise, considering that Aristotle’s own teacher, Plato (427 BC - 347 BC), felt that any person is susceptible to persuasion through flattery and charm. Because Aristotle is careful to identify rhetoric as a tool, he makes certain that the reader understands the impartiality of persuasion as a skill; rhetoric is not essen-tially good or evil; its use determines its morality. This idea is very important to the above-mentioned divisions that Aristotle created when defining the term “rheto-ric.” These divisions, as mentioned, occur according to audience and purpose.

To be persuasive, a speaker or writer must, according to Aristotle, know his audience. While persuasion is a skill that belongs to the speaker, the actual speech must belong to the audience. Each listener will respond differently to di-verse forms of persuasion, so the speaker must form his argument based on the qualities his audience will find appealing. Aristotle knew this, and he adjusted his instructions in Rhetoric to compensate for different types of speeches and their cor-responding audiences.

As mentioned, Aristotle argues that flattery is entirely separate from rheto-ric. True persuasion does not result from flattery. In fact, if a person realizes he is being flattered, he may feel patronized and view the speaker with contempt. Rheto-ric, on the other hand, can incite a response from any person. If the speaker argues his point well, he will typically earn the respect of his audience, even if he does not succeed in changing the opinion of every audience member. This ability to make a sound argument and to know that one has made a sound argument even if every member of the audience does not agree is one of the foundations of true rhetoric.

This is why the rhetorician must be aware of the role audience plays. Al-though it does not happen often, at times, an audience may be persuaded by a simple statement of facts. Take, for example, a news segment in which the news station persuades the viewer to vote with one particular political party. Without undue pomp or circumstance, an anchor might present a bulleted list of facts, all of which suggest the positive traits of a political party. All of this occurs without outright endorsement. Gradually, however, the viewer will form an argument in his own mind. Ordinarily, this sort of incomplete argument would not stand up to scrutiny, but this biased set of facts leads the viewer to the conclusion the news sta-

28

tion desires. Modern rhetorician Douglas Ehninger reinforces this position: “The person addressed, no less than the person making an appeal, is an active participant in the process by which convictions are formed or actions chosen” (5). This sort of persuasion works with a complete lack of flattery, so rhetoric must be more compli-cated than simply appealing to an audience’s collective ego.

Quintilian (c. 35 BC - c. 100 BC), a famous rhetorician in his own right, stressed the necessity of study and practice to developing one’s oratorical skills (McTavish 75). He also stressed that flattery and emotion can take a rhetorician only so far. While one can use flattery in any context with very little thought, form-ing concise arguments requires practice. Overall, one should understand that the use of rhetoric involves more than an emotional appeal to one’s audience. Careful planning and skill are required to create a successful argument. In fact, “many teach-ers of rhetoric in ancient Athens and Rome found it useful to think of rhetorical training and performance as roughly analogous to athletic competition” (Crowley and Hawhee 27). The more one practices and debates, the better at rhetoric he becomes. As Crowley and Hawhee say, “while there was much disagreement among the ancients about the best way to learn rhetoric, most of them agreed on three points: practice, practice, and practice” (28). One learns rhetoric just as he learns other skills, through practice and perseverance. Therefore, learning rhetoric is more than just learning to appeal to emotion.

To build on the idea that rhetoric is a separate study in itself, Aristotle further defines rhetoric as a tool. In particular, he focuses on the idea previously mentioned that rhetoric is not positive or negative in its own right but that the use of rhetoric determines its virtue (Aristotle 6). All great speeches have traits in com-mon, and every solid argument has its base in the principles of rhetoric established by Aristotle. It is how one uses these principles that determines morality.

The most mundane uses of persuasive argument demonstrate this con-cept. Think of a time when one might have witnessed a small form of persuasion; friends may convince another friend that underage drinking is acceptable or that studying is a more profitable enterprise than cheating. These two influences have very different results for the friend being persuaded, but both stances follow the same common form of rhetoric, indicating that it is not the form of the argument that determines the virtue but the subject.

Rhetoric is a tool, and, like any other tool, the value of rhetoric stems from its versatility and effectiveness. Though these common examples provide one with an idea of rhetoric’s potential, they fail to demonstrate its latent quality. As a tool, rhetoric in itself is impartial; when used, however, rhetoric provides a vehicle for even the most extreme of causes. To understand the flexibility of rhetoric, one must consider some of the greatest speakers in history. Adolf Hitler, for example, is considered a great orator, despite the crimes he committed. Hitler relied on his persuasive speaking to gain power and influence his opposition. As Davis, Dulicai, and Viczian argue, “he had had years of practice speaking at rallies, perfecting his oratorical style until it was among the most effective ever witnessed” (152). Unfor-tunately, Hitler used his command of rhetoric to convince a legion of followers to

29

commit terrible acts during the Holocaust, revealing that rhetoric is a tool capable of great evil when used by a malevolent person.

However, rhetoric can also be used for noble purposes. Most Americans are familiar with Martin Luther King, Jr. As a social reform leader, King used rheto-ric to command the attention of people from all backgrounds. King’s public career began when he was elected, without his knowledge, as President of the Montgom-ery Improvement Association. Soon after, he was expected to deliver an address at a community rally. Despite being “possessed by fear,” King delivered “a superb ora-tion at a jam-packed meeting” (Garrow 438). Unlike Hitler’s orations, the speeches of Martin Luther King, Jr. convinced people that equality and brotherhood were the answer to conflict. Clearly, these two famous orators possessed similar skill in the use of rhetoric, but each used his prowess for an entirely different cause. These examples indicate that rhetoric is simply a tool; otherwise, both an evil man, Adolf Hitler, and a force for equality, Martin Luther King, Jr., could not have used it ef-fectively.

According to Aristotle, an author must cater his language and style of argu-ment so that it may be easily understood and received by his audience. Aristotle did not experience a wide range of audiences during his time (educated men were the primary audience of his day), but he still recognized that a single type of language or tone is not appropriate for every occasion or for every type of prose or oration. Contemporary rhetoricians have maintained this position: “Because of rhetoric, cookbooks are not written like legal contracts, insurance policies do not read like love letters, and love letters do not sound like State of the Union speeches. Yet there is no law that this should be so. It is merely the effect of rhetoric — a combination of audience expectation and writer’s desire to please that operates like a force of na-ture” (Winkler and McCuen 5). When considering an argument, one should first decide whom he would be persuading. An audience’s general characteristics should be taken into account, such as age, social class, profession, gender, and faith. For example, a group of mothers would likely not respond well as a whole to an argu-ment based on the finer points of N.A.S.C.A.R., and a jury sitting for a homicide case would not be persuaded solely by an emotional argument.

Aristotle follows one rule in particular about orating (which, today, may be extended to writing as well). Unless he knows he is speaking to a group of experts, the speaker should assume that his audience is composed of “untrained thinkers” who will be unable to follow arguments based on premises that are not general knowledge (Aristotle 9). Unless he knows otherwise, a speaker should never assume any expertise in his audience. A complex argument using very complicated terms would quickly confuse most audiences, so it is important to use terms that are well known by the group one intends to persuade. For example, an argument based on Christian theology might be lost on an audience of atheists or on a more general group. Therefore, general terms can be extremely useful when one does not know the extent of an audience’s knowledge. Roderick Hart provides an excellent ex-ample of this in his book Modern Rhetorical Criticism; he discusses the story of a man named F.J. Gould, who once wrote a book full of sample messages for an atheist’s funeral service. Instead of using religious terminology, Gould “canvasses human

30

sentiments, human challenges, and human virtues” (Hart 235). Gould’s audience was greatly varied, so, in order to create a valid argument, he used general terms that related to all members of his potential audience.

The issue of audience is also demonstrated in the political arena. The type of rhetoric Aristotle suggests was extremely useful in the democratic system estab-lished by the Greeks because it allowed orators and politicians to appeal to a diverse audience. Democracy is a system of government based on the votes of individuals; the leader of a majority group possesses the most power. In contrast to the repre-sentative system of democracy established today in the United States, the Greek system allowed every educated member of society the chance to vote. When each person’s vote counts equally, a motion for any type of action must appeal to a large part of the audience in order to be passed. Even though the audience in Aristotle’s day would have been more homogenous than a modern audience, opinions would still have varied. The ability to persuade a large group of people provides a distinct advantage in such a setting. We see a similar use of rhetoric in political speeches today, when a speaker attempts to appeal to the masses in order to gain the most votes, indicating that rhetoric is alive and well in the modern world.

Another famous thinker, Marcus Tullius Cicero (106 BC – 43 BC), held many of the same beliefs as Aristotle on the topic of rhetoric. Like Aristotle, Cicero was concerned with the philosophical concepts of rhetoric and oratory. Cicero was a famous Roman orator and politician who recorded his thoughts on leading a moral life in a series of essays collected in On the Good Life. As an avid student of Greek writings, Cicero was familiar with the works of Aristotle and Plato. Like Aristotle, Cicero knew that rhetoric is a tool that can be used for good or evil; in order to prevent the use of rhetoric for evil, he insisted that an orator-politician should have both excellent morals and “a wide and liberal culture” (Cicero 235). Greeks and Romans tended to equate wisdom with goodness and justice, which explains Cicero’s ideas on rhetoric: the combination of rhetoric with philosophical knowledge ensured correct expression and conduct. To Cicero, it was the role of the orator to be well versed in all areas, including rhetoric; to argue well, a person must know more than just the topic at hand. Cicero also believed firmly in the ability of the orator to improve the state, and rhetoric was a tool he could use to do this.

As a politician, Cicero used rhetoric extensively through oratory because it was his main means of establishing himself in a political office and maintaining his position. Cicero claims that it is a mistake to underestimate rhetoric’s signifi-cance (Cicero 274). He also clearly feels that the occupation of a rhetorician is valid and important, even necessary. First, Cicero addresses the type of person that can become an orator of sound rhetoric: “For certain active intellectual gifts and talents are absolutely essential: swiftness of invention, fluency of expression and elabora-tion, and a strong and retentive memory. People that think these are assets that can be picked up by theoretical study are quite mistaken” (Cicero 276). In Cicero’s view, a person must have a certain amount of natural ability to become a successful orator. While all people may be able to learn the essentials of rhetoric, those who pursue oratory as a profession (those who, in the modern world, would be politi-cians and lawyers) must go beyond the basics.

31

To elaborate on the idea of how important orators and, by extension, rhet-oric, were to ancient Roman culture, Cicero compares the reactions audiences had to orators and other trades, such as acting, that are considered skills. According to Cicero, orators are judged more harshly than other performers. An actor who per-forms badly can explain his shortcomings by stating that he was not “in the mood” or that he felt ill. An orator, on the other hand, has his faults attributed to stupidity: “And nobody regards [stupidity] as a good enough excuse! — because stupidity is not something which can be explained away on the grounds of indigestion or because one was not in the mood” (Cicero 279). Acquiring a reputation for stupidity is espe-cially harmful for an orator, who, as Aristotle says, is judged primarily on his good sense, as well as his good moral character and good will (60). Since, in Cicero’s view, orators were largely responsible for serving as good role models and for upholding intellectual and moral standards, their failures were more serious than the failures of others. Clearly, oratory and rhetoric were important in ancient Rome.

According to Cicero, a man need only be average in every other subject, but he must excel in rhetoric. The successful orator-rhetorician must have “the acuteness of a logician, the profundity of a philosopher, the diction virtually of a poet, the memory of a lawyer, the voice of a performer in a tragic drama, [and] the gestures, you might almost say, of an actor at the very top of his profession” (Cicero 280). The orator-rhetorician’s goal is to serve his people. Therefore, it is his duty to lead and to serve as a good, moral example. Doing so takes much skill and much practice, so the orator-rhetorician must take his role very seriously.

Like Aristotle, Cicero believed that fear, although it may be effective at first, is not a proper persuasive technique. A person who persuades and leads by fear will ultimately fail. As Cicero says, “to make people frightened is the way not to maintain one’s position but to lose it” (131). Leading others is far easier when the audience can be persuaded through moral means to believe in a particular course of action. As the example with Adolf Hitler and Martin Luther King, Jr. illustrates, rhetoric and oratory may be used either for good or evil, but it is up to the indi-vidual to make the correct choice.

Clearly, rhetoric was important in Ancient Greece and Rome. Because it was so important, it was a subject that was taught extensively in both cultures. Writ-ten records indicate that the Greeks were the first to practice and teach rhetoric. As Thomas M. Conley says, “the true birthplace of rhetorical instruction was Athens, and the first instructors were those itinerant teachers who flocked there in the mid-fifth century, the so-called Sophists” (4). By the fourth century BC, rhetoric had become a staple of the school system in both Greece and Rome. The rhetoric curriculum was broken into a five-part analysis, included a method of invention, and utilized exercises known as progymnasmata (Conley 45).

The term progymnasmata is attributed to a text, Rhetoric to Alexander, which was written during the fourth century BC (Crowley and Hawhee 31). Rhetoric teachers favored the progymnasmata because the exercises were sequenced in such a way that each consecutive exercise built on the lesson learned in the last. There-fore, completing the progymnasmata over a period of time would produce a student capable of mature rhetoric. The exercises “begin with simple paraphrases . . . and

32

end with sophisticated exercises in deliberative and forensic rhetoric. . . . Young students practiced imitating and elaborating on fables, tales, chreia, and proverbs;” older students “composed commonplaces, descriptions (ekphrasis), characters (etho-poeia), comparisons (synkresis), and speeches of praise (encomia) and blame (psogos, invective)” (Crowley and Hawhee 32). Extensive practice using progymnasmata could result in the creation of “rhetorical superheroes” who could respond with an argu-ment using a variety of rhetorical patterns (Crowley and Hawhee 32). The fact that the ancient Greeks and Romans devoted so much of their educational system to rhetoric indicates just how valuable the skill was to their cultures. Today, many students of rhetoric continue to study these same progymnasmata to improve their rhetorical skills.

During the cultural and political upheaval of the Middle Ages, the preser-vation and teaching of rhetoric was left in the hands of scholars concerned primarily with the practicality of rhetoric and less with the theory behind it. Thinkers began to explore the uses of rhetoric in theological settings and concern themselves with developing “applied rhetoric.” This means that methods were developed to teach students specific skills for tasks defined by “institutional needs and programs,” such as letter writing, verse composition, and preaching (Conley 73). In this sense, the art of rhetoric declined during the Middle Ages.

Any decline that became apparent during the Middle Ages was quickly reversed at the onset of the Renaissance, however. An increased interest in classical texts led scholars back to the works of Cicero and Quintilian; they seemed especial-ly interested in rhetorical works. The scholars of the Renaissance also reintroduced the progymnasmata in hope of producing well-rounded rhetoricians. In addition, the use and study of rhetoric took on an especially noble disposition during the Renais-sance: “The eloquence these scholars sought to master was not an empty pomposity of language or the extravagant artifice sometimes associated with rhetoric, but the harmonious union of wisdom and style whose aim was to guide men toward civic virtue, not to mislead them for the sake of winning the day” (Conley 109). This concept of rhetoric is quite reminiscent of Cicero’s noble goals for the art.

Another major contribution to rhetoric came in the form of a proper philosophical method, published by the French philosopher, mathematician, and scientist René Descartes (1596–1650). His method embodies principles many of us are familiar with and that are still in use today. He states that an argument should begin with the most basic components and move step-by-step to inferences that are more complex (Conley 171). According to Descartes, one must first state what is known to be true. As a reader or listener, one must never assume information to be true unless it is clearly recognizable as fact. From there, one must divide the prob-lem at hand “into as many portions as [are] possible” (Descartes 182). Separating an argument into its basic components allows more specific solutions to be applied to each facet of the problem. These individual solutions are then combined to form the overall argument. Descartes’ final precept focuses on the completeness of an argument. One should take care to make his argument comprehensive; a lack of information can confuse readers and will allow an opponent a point from which to attack the argument (Descartes 182). While they may not be explicitly stated, these

33

precepts extend from Aristotle and help to form the foundations of modern argu-ment and rhetoric.

In the modern era, scholars such as Stephen Toulmin and Douglas Eh-ninger continue to extend Aristotle’s ideas. They argue that rhetoric is something we use every day and that it is something that the common man can learn. Building on Toulmin’s (and, by extension, Aristotle’s) ideas, Ehninger explains that every argument can be broken into three basic parts: evidence, warrant, and claim. Each of these contributes to the overall argument; the evidence provides a starting point that is known to be true, while the claim is the conclusion that is drawn from the author’s argument. The warrant provides a segue from evidence to claim that ex-plains why the reader, if he believes the evidence to be true, should also believe that the claim is true (Ehninger 11).

While it is true that there are other forms of argument, such as en-thymemes, that do not use all three parts of a typical argument, no one part of an argument can stand alone. An otherwise solid claim can easily be countered without at least the support of a warrant. Following a thesis with a small amount of proof sets the tone for the overall argument. When one simply states a claim, it can be attacked from any angle. A claim with a warrant attached, however, must be refuted based on the reasoning established in the warrant. Therefore, all parts of an argument work together to form the whole. By recognizing these parts, the modern scholars argue, any person can make a well-reasoned argument.

It is interesting to note that the overwhelming majority of books that have been written on the topic of rhetoric, beginning with Aristotle and extending to modern day, are instruction manuals. Regardless of time, each author strives to record the finer points of persuasive language so that another may learn the art of rhetoric. Self-help books like Getting Your Way Every Day by Alan Axelrod and study materials such as Rhetoric Made Plain by Anthony Winkler and Jo Ray McCuen are the modern day equivalents of Aristotle’s Rhetoric. All of these examples indicate that the basic principles of rhetoric transcend time; the only reason humans con-tinue to change rhetoric is to adapt it to their specific purposes.

Each individual perceives the world differently, so human beings have dis-agreements. In addition, the translation from perception to language often results in the communication of inaccurate information, creating further disagreement. With all of this contention in mind, the ancient teachers of rhetoric “invented rhetoric so that they would have means of judging whose opinion was most accu-rate, useful, or valuable” (Crowley and Hawhee 2). Since humans argue, rhetoric is necessary to settle those arguments.

An integral part of human language, rhetoric will be relevant as long as humans have a form of communication. The great philosophers of Greece and Rome, including Aristotle, were concerned with the art of rhetoric; today, class-rooms are dedicated to the study of persuasive argument, and self-help books are published based on Aristotle’s own principles of rhetoric. In final testament to the transcendence of rhetoric, one only has to consider the form of this very paper. In the words of Aristotle, “I have done. You have heard me. The facts are before you. I ask for your judgement” (158).

34

Works CitedAristotle. Rhetoric. Trans. W. Rhys Roberts. Mineola, NY: Dover, 2004. Print: Rheto-

ric provides Aristotle’s arguments on the structure and function of rheto-ric. This book provides the basic ideas that are discussed in this essay.

Axelrod, Alan. Getting Your Way Every Day: Mastering the Lost Art of Persuasion. New York: AMACOM, 2007. Print: This is a modern equivalent of Aristotle’s Rhetoric. The ideas contained within are similar and provide evidence that rhetoric is timeless. The book was used to demonstrate that Aristotle’s ideas are still used today.

Cicero, Marcus Tullius. On the Good Life. Trans. Michael Grant. New York: Pen-guin, 1971. Print: The section titled “On the Orator” discusses the impor-tance of oration and rhetoric to Roman life. The book was used to show how Cicero’s ideas expand upon Aristotle’s.

Conley, Thomas M. Rhetoric in the European Tradition. Chicago: U of Chicago P, 1990. Print: This book traces the history and development of rhetoric through different cultures and times, focusing primarily on European tra-ditions. It provided solid background information for this paper.

Crowley, Sharon and Debra Hawhee. Ancient Rhetorics for Contemporary Students. 4th ed. New York: Pearson, 2009. Print: This book details the lives and work of ancient rhetoricians and reveals the amount of practice most rhetori-cians perform. It also provided solid historical background information for the paper.

Davis, Martha, Dianne Dulicai, and Ildiko Viczian. “Hitler’s Movement Signature.” TDR 36.2 (1992): 152-172. JSTOR. Web. 12 Oct. 2010: This article dis-cusses Hitler’s rhetorical style and his abilities as an orator. It was used to illustrate how oratory can be used for malevolent purposes.

Descartes, Rene. “I Think, Therefore I am…” Enlightenment Reader. Ed. Isaac Kram-nick. New York: Penguin, 1995. 181-185. Print: This book explains Des-cartes’ four precepts of logic. The essay was used to show how the system of logic established by Descartes influenced the development of rhetoric.

Ehninger, Douglas. Influence, Belief, and Argument: An Introduction to Responsible Per-suasion. Glenview, IL: Scott, Foresman and Company, 1974. Print: This book discusses the uses of persuasive appeals, as well as the construction of those appeals. It was used to show that modern rhetoricians continue to expand on Aristotle’s ideas.

Garrow, David J. “Martin Luther King, Jr. and the Spirit of Leadership.” The Journal of American History 74.2 (1987): 438-447. JSTOR. Web. 12 Oct. 2010: This article discusses Martin Luther King, Jr.’s skills at oration and some of his early speeches. It was used to illustrate how oratory can be used for posi-tive purposes.

Hart, Roderick P. Modern Rhetorical Criticism. Glenview, IL: Scott, Foresman and Company, 1990. Print: This is a guidebook for criticizing existing argu-ments. Seeing the guidelines that are used to judge arguments provided an extra vantage point for discussing the similarities in the format of argu-ments over time.

35

McTavish, James. “The Ethos of the Practice of Rhetoric.” Philippiniana Sacra 45.133 (2010): 66-78. EBSCO. Web. 27 Sept. 2010: This document discusses Aris-totle’s history and the contributions of other authors to the development of rhetoric. It provided good background information for the paper.

Twain, Mark. The Adventures of Tom Sawyer. Ed. Paul Baender. Berkeley: U of Califor-nia P, 1980. Print: In one scene in this book, Tom Sawyer uses persuasive argument to trick the other boys in his neighborhood into white-washing his fence. This scene was used to provide an example of how rhetoric can be used for various purposes.

Winkler, Anthony C. and Jo Ray McCuen. Rhetoric Made Plain. San Diego: Har-court, 1984. Print: This book, written for a classroom setting, is a modern instructional book on the art of rhetoric. It was used in this paper to show that rhetoric is still used in the modern classroom.

Works ConsultedBaird, A. Craig. Rhetoric: A Philosophical Inquiry. New York: Ronald Press, 1965.

Print: This book discusses the applications and boundaries of rhetoric, as well as the ethics associated with the use of rhetoric.

Campbell, Paul Newell. Rhetoric: A Study of the Communicative and Aesthetic Dimen-sions of Language. Belmont, CA: Dickenson, 1972. Print: This book pos-sesses striking similarities to Aristotle’s Rhetoric in both format and con-tent. It is useful in proving the transcendence of Aristotle’s reasoning.

Plato. Gorgias. Trans. Donald J. Zeyl. Indianapolis: Hackett, 1987. Print: Plato gives a contrasting argument to Aristotle’s views. Plato feels that rhetoric is not an art or skill and that the orator does not have to be an expert on the subject he is discussing.

Wilson, Thomas. Wilson’s Arte of Rhetorique. London: Clarendon, 1560. Print: This book is another manual instructing readers on the finer points of rhetoric. It dates back to the 1500s and provides first-hand insight into the develop-ment of rhetoric.

Yellin, Keith. Battle Exortation: The Rhetoric of Combat Leadership. Columbia: U of South Carolina P, 2008. Print: This book provides examples of rhetoric from military leaders. The use of rhetoric by the military shows the versa-tility of rhetoric.

Freshman Writing Prize Winner

Each year, the Freshman Writing Program awards one student with the Freshman Writing Prize. This prize honors a student who has demonstrated mastery of the rhetorical techniques and argumentative strategies studied over the course of the two terms. This year’s winner is Cassondra Bruce ’14. Here we present an abridged version of Cassondra’s twenty-page paper from Term I, which proposes an amendment to the Constitution that would help to prevent future economic crises. In her paper, Cassondra draws thoughtful parallels between recent economic events

36

and those of the past, revealing that historically based projects can have valuable contemporary applications.

Amending the Constitution for the Benefit of the Economy: A Proposalby Cassondra Bruce ’14

Outline: Amending the Constitution for the Benefit of the Economy: A Proposal

Thesis: The United States has repeatedly encountered economic turmoil. However, an amendment to the Constitution could help prevent future economic problems. Such an amendment should include an expansion of the Council of Economic Advisers and mandated economic training for the President, both of which would ensure that the President could propose informed solutions to economic crises. With this amendment in place, U.S. citizens might feel more confident in the Ex-ecutive Branch’s economic policy.

I. How could the Constitution be amended to promote economic welfare?II. What has caused depressions and recessions to occur in the past?III. What types of presidential policies have preceded economic crises?IV. How might depressions and recessions be prevented?V. What are the benefits of expanding presidential economic education?VI. What are the benefits of expanding the Council of Economic Advisers?VII. What overall benefits would result from the proposed amendment?

Paper: Amending the Constitution for the Benefit of the Economy: A Proposal

The United States has repeatedly encountered economic turmoil. How-ever, an amendment to the Constitution could help prevent future economic prob-lems. Such an amendment should include an expansion of the Council of Eco-nomic Advisers and mandated economic training for the President, both of which would ensure that the President could propose informed solutions to economic crises. With this amendment in place, U.S. citizens might feel more confident in the Executive Branch’s economic policy.

In order to more fully comprehend the benefits of such an amendment and how it may help prevent future economic crises, it is necessary to explore some of past major economic crises our nation has faced. The largest crisis of course was the Great Depression of the 1930s. While blame for the Great Depression may lie largely with President Hoover, a single Secretary of the Treasury, Andrew Mellon, may be responsible for the economic growth before the Great Depression, which led to massive speculation on the stock market (Appleby et al. 657). Mellon was appointed by Warren Harding, and, after Harding’s death, continued to advise Cal-

37

vin Coolidge and Herbert Hoover (Appleby et al. 647). Mellon’s policy focused on running the nation as a corporation. His primary goal was to balance the nation’s budget, reduce its debts, and cut taxes. Mellon believed that his policies would encourage economic growth and prosperity by allowing the government to collect more taxes at the lower rate than the higher, granting the nation an opportunity to repay its debt even faster (Appleby et al. 648). His methods later became recognized as supply-side economics, which focuses on supplying the people with more dispos-able income by reducing taxes and ultimately generating a positive cycle to allow for further spending and economic growth. Between 1921 and 1929, Mellon’s financial policies of cutting the United States’ budget to less than half of the original over seven years and the economic boom that accompanied his actions allowed for a decline in the national deficit by 8 billion dollars (Appleby et al. 648).

Mellon’s economic successes led Americans to believe in the nation’s financial stability, which encouraged them to invest their earnings: “a prolonged bull market convinced many Americans to invest heavily in stocks” and “by 1929, between 3 and 4 million Americans owned stocks” (Appleby et al. 657). The grow-ing success and trust leading up to the Great Depression caused the stock market crash of 1929 to affect many more than would have been affected without the increased confidence. As stock prices continued to climb to unrealistic levels, lend-ing banks and stock brokers were prompted by declining prices to make margin calls, or requests of immediate loan repayments, which began the market’s crash (Brinkley 680). According to historian Alan Brinkley, “A collapse of much of the banking system followed the stock market crash. Over 9000 American banks either went bankrupt or closed their doors between 1930 and 1933. Depositors lost over 2.5 billion dollars in deposits” (680). The lost investments led to deflation, mean-ing that as the money supply decreased, the dollar’s value increased, prompting a decline in prices.

Many historians have argued that President Hoover should have reacted more resolutely by aiding the unemployed directly. However, Hoover’s veto of the Garner-Wagner Bill, a government stipend to the unemployed, removed all hope of any empathy from the Hoover administration. Not until President Franklin Dela-no Roosevelt’s New Deal would the public regain faith in presidential leadership. Because of his New Deal, President Roosevelt is often recognized as the nation’s economic rescuer. However, it is important to recognize that Roosevelt’s lack of “po-litical ideology” also led to him to seek advice from many advisors (Appleby et al. 683). These advisors varied in experience and often had opposing views. Although Mellon was the advisor to Roosevelt’s predecessors, Roosevelt sought advice from his own Treasury Secretary, Henry Morgenthau. While Mellon had a clear plan from the beginning, Roosevelt did not; however, after consulting with many advi-sors, he devised what was to be known as the New Deal, which promised a new pact for the common man (Appleby et al. 683).

While Hoover was distracted by concerns that the public would become too dependent on the government, Roosevelt was willing to deficit spend and pro-vide direct aid to the people without regard to constitutionality. His First New Deal provided government-sponsored building programs to restructure the banking sys-

38

tem and employ the jobless. The First New Deal included legislation that promoted the creation of jobs by federal spending. Nine new agencies were added to the federal bureaucracy: the Civilian Conservation Corps (CCC), the Tennessee Valley Authority (TVA), the Agricultural Adjustment Act (AAA), the Federal Emergency Relief Agency (FERA), the National Recovery Administration (NRA), the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC), Public Works Administration (PWA), the Civil Works Administration (CWA), and the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC). The First New Deal was an immense effort of relief, reform, and recovery, and it extended to all areas. For example, the Civilian Conservation Corps allowed for the creation of jobs in conservation and the protection of forests. As nature was served, young male workers were able to make money to send home, while the men lived in provided housing (Appleby et al. 687).

While Roosevelt is credited with ending the Great Depression, he has been attacked by historians for overstepping his boundaries and violating the Con-stitution. One of the most controversial programs of the New Deal was that it al-lowed for the government’s interference in the power industry with the Tennessee Valley Authority. By creating a cheap source of energy for the people of the Tennes-see Valley, the government was in direct competition with private industry; thus, the TVA allowed for the price of power to decline, forcing many private companies out of business. Many industrialists thought this smacked too much of socialism and warranted much criticism of the President’s power.

Bringing similar criticism was the Agricultural Adjustment Act, which the Supreme Court challenged and declared unconstitutional in the case U.S. v. Butler, 1936. The AAA bought surplus agricultural products and helped raise the minimum price for farmers’ goods; however, the means used to help the economy were deemed unconstitutional (Appleby et al. 687). The arguments of unconstitu-tionality did not stop there. Like the CCC, the Federal Emergency Relief Agency granted money to state and local governments to help unemployed citizens. Prompt-ing more attack on President Roosevelt, the NRA created fair competition, which in turn controlled the prices and principles of industrial production. Once again, the Supreme Court declared a New Deal program unconstitutional with the ruling of Schechter Poultry v. U.S., 1935 (Appleby et al. 687). Although the programs worked, their validity and honesty were being challenged.

While the included provisions of the New Deal allowed for a path out of unemployment and to economic recovery, other legislation also contributed. Accompanying his New Deal was Roosevelt’s Home Owners’ Loan Corporation, or HOLC, which was established in the hope that it would aid homeowners in paying their mortgages. The HOLC was designed to buy mortgages of homeowners who were severely behind in payments and allow them to make payments over an extended period of time at a lower interest rate (Appleby et al. 686). Although the plan may seem overly generous, it was only available to employed persons, qualify-ing about ten percent of all homeowners for such a loan (Appleby et al. 686).

Also a contributor to the road out of depression was Roosevelt’s Second New Deal, which was passed in 1935 and was to further expedite recovery by di-rectly providing jobs to unemployed citizens. The Works Progress Administration

39

(WPA), Rural Electrification Administration (REA), Social Security Act, Public Utility Holding Company Act, Banking Act, and Resettlement Act were encom-passed by Roosevelt’s second major legislative attempt (Appleby et al. 692). While the WPA created jobs, the Social Security Act provided a system for the unem-ployed, disabled, elderly, and caretakers, as the Resettlement Act helped families and sharecroppers in need to purchase land or farms (Appleby et al. 692). The REA helped to further urbanize rural areas by incorporating electricity into agricultural areas, the Public Utility Holding Company Act created fairness among utility com-panies, and the Banking Act strengthened the Federal Reserve, which controls in-terest rates (Appleby et al. 692). To counter the Supreme Court, in his Second New Deal, Roosevelt adopted a “court packing plan” to add six democratic justices to the court, with hopes of gaining program support and constitutional interpretation that the court could deliver (Appleby et al. 697). Despite his attempts, this action was also declared unconstitutional.

The current presidential administration has suffered similar criticism of the proposed legislation to create a path out of the economic recession our country is currently experiencing. Basically, both are seen as having overstepped the bounds of the Executive office. Whereas President Roosevelt created programs that directly employed the unemployed, President Obama implemented a government bailout of the banking industry that was intended to help heal the recession and put more money in the hands of the people, thus stimulating the economy. It may be argued that President Obama, having studied history, based his decisions on past successes such as Roosevelt’s. The problem, however, is that, as Appleby et al. point out, de-spite their success, Roosevelt’s New Deal projects were declared unconstitutional, as they interfered with the federal government’s right to regulate intrastate com-merce in the Supreme Court case Schechter Poultry v. The United States (686). Roosevelt’s concerns about the Republican influence from within the Supreme Court were realized by the Supreme Court justices’ elimination of his program. As a result, job losses returned unemployment rates to 1929 levels, prompting a second Roosevelt depression (Brinkley 708). So, putting a stop to many of the programs caused a second depression, indicating that the programs themselves were success-ful. The main issue here, then, was the fact that some of the programs were deemed unconstitutional, and the question arises: when faced with a depression, was it cor-rect of Roosevelt to ignore the Constitution in favor of saving the country economi-cally? The same question has been raised about President Obama’s bailout plan.

Despite their being deemed unconstitutional, it seems that the achieve-ments of Roosevelt’s programs outweighed the possible disregard of the Constitu-tion. Therefore, due to the economic success and benefits for the nation as a whole, it seems that similar programs should be considered when they are necessary to climb out of a difficult depression. Although this may seem like giving the President too much power and power that is not granted to him in the Constitution, put-ting in place the amendment suggested here would help to curb that power. And of course the system of check and balances guaranteed in the Constitution would still exist. Ultimately, in a democracy, we must put a certain amount of trust in our elected leaders to do the best thing for the most people. President Obama studied

40

Roosevelt’s plans as guidelines to achieve economic stimulation. This is a pattern to encourage. Ultimately, ensuring that all presidents are educated in the history of economic policy may be crucial to achieving renewed economic success and guaran-teeing more constant economic stability.

The primary cause of the current economic recession, which began in 2007, was, as stated in testimony given by Christina Romer, Chair of the Coun-cil of Economic Advisers, the plummeting worth of homes and stocks (Romer 1). Because of the availability of credit loaned to risky clients and their failure to re-pay the banks, interest on loans skyrocketed, contributing to economic hardship. According to Nouriel Roubini, Professor of Economics at New York University’s Stern School of Business, “because of a credit bubble that went beyond mortgages and because of reckless financial innovation and securitization the ongoing credit bust [led] to a severe credit crunch” (Roubini 5). The credit bubble, combined with frivolous spending, caused the most recent recession to outlast shorter past down-turns (Roubini 5). Many homeowners and business owners took advantage of the booming housing market to gain property and increase assets. However, despite the availability of credit from lenders, not all clients should have been considered for loan opportunities. As many loans were taken and not repaid, the banks were put in a hardship. Without the income from interest and loan payments, reserves began to dwindle and many banks faced bankruptcy (Roubini 7). When a bank depletes its monetary reserves, it places its clients in a position of economic turmoil and resulting hysteria.

Often, economic hardships result from Executive policies. Mimicking Harding, Coolidge, and Hoover, George W. Bush implemented laissez-faire policies soon after his election. These policies allotted businesses many new economic free-doms. Several of these freedoms, however, were too drastic and created bankruptcy and controversy. Soon after his inauguration, President Bush also drastically cut taxes in an effort to promote spending; however, Appleby et al. argue, his policies resulted in plummeting job and stock markets, accompanied by the destruction of new Internet-based companies (807). Besides tax cuts that refunded tax payers and reduced tax rates, primarily for individuals in the higher tax brackets, President Bush also implemented education and Medicare reforms, which helped lead the nation into debt.

Appleby et al. assert that, during the early years of his presidency, President Bush’s policies were relaxed for big businesses (807). Perhaps his policies allowed too many leniencies for the large corporations, which spurred several scandals. One well-known instance of corporate scandal took place within the “large energy trad-ing company called Enron” (Appleby et al. 807). Because Enron had the freedom to conceal its financial actions and investments from its stockholders, many were victimized and investors lost billions (“Real Enron”). According to a New Republic article, “the scandal [was] that conservatives in Washington systematically rejected a series of safeguards that would have alleviated the damage from Enron’s collapse, or even prevented it altogether” (“Real Enron”). President Bush allowed the cru-cial provisions to be rejected; however, to prevent further bankruptcies, Congress passed the Public Company Accounting Reform and Investor Protection Act, oth-

41

erwise known as the Sarbanes-Oxley Act (Appleby et al. 807). The law, “tightened accounting rules and toughened penalties for dishonest executives;” thus, in favor of protecting its investors and the people, it held businesses more accountable than they previously were (Appleby et al. 807). Yet, the stage for the current recession was set.

To curb such potential fallouts from occurring again, the proposed amendment would mandate that all candidates running for the presidency have a background in economics and the history of economics. Many warning signs and actions could be heeded if the Chief Executive of the nation were familiar with economic principles and procedures. A background in economics could consist of a major or minor in Economics from a college or university, or it might mean ex-tensive pre-inaugural briefing by the government’s Economic Committee, as well as extensive advising from the Council of Economic Advisers. The method by which the material is conveyed is not as important as the knowledge of the principles of economics.

While the prerequisite of an economic background may be an ideal solu-tion to the problem of ill-informed leaders, the constitutionality of this provision is questionable. Despite the possible infringements upon the President’s freedom of education, the inclusion of the mandate has the potential to vastly diminish the probability of recurring economic problems. Also, since the President may attain this knowledge after he is elected, as a pre-requisite of beginning his job, this is more of a job requirement than forcing a certain type of education on the future president. Overall, being equipped with a basic knowledge of economic principles and precedents could allow for further economic growth, thus promoting the Unit-ed States’ economic strength and quicker rebounds when faced with hardships. In general, a better understanding of economic market structures and principles would allow the President to react more readily and effectively to events that could harm the nation’s financial and economic situation.

Education is important, but a president also needs advisors. The President of the United States already has a committee of highly educated advisors to aid him in his decision-making processes; however, if the Council of Economic Advisers, or CEA, were to be expanded to include a more diverse group, then the President’s economic decisions may be more sound and comprehensive. The Council was es-tablished by the Employment Act of 1946, and it is currently composed of only two people, a Chairman and one other member. As the Council is composed of only two people, the formal opinions and strategies that are offered to the President are limited (Weidenbaum 238). It is the duty of the CEA “to develop and recommend to the President, national economic policies to foster and promote free competi-tive enterprise, to avoid economic fluctuations or to diminish the effects thereof, and to maintain employment, production, and purchasing power” (Hafer 68). The Council of Economic Advisers plays a crucial role in the President’s position as an economic leader. Therefore, the Council should be supremely equipped with rang-ing suggestions and policy solutions.

Expanding the Council of Economic Advisers would maximize the num-ber and quality of opinions; therefore, development of the Council could greatly

42

advance the success of the President’s economic actions. Combined with the re-quirement that the President himself should have education and background in economics, this expanded Council would ensure that more points of view be con-sidered. It would also ensure that the President be aware of historical information. Overall, it would allow for a broad range of individuals to interpret past events and to identify economic patterns and suggest ways to prevent future crises.

Historically, parallel reigns have preceded times of economic hardship. Regan’s supply-side economics and George W. Bush’s business leniencies mim-icked Harding, Coolidge, and Hoover’s laissez-faire policies toward businesses of the 1920s; the administrations that followed, those of Roosevelt and Obama, inher-ited a nation headed for economic turmoil. Perhaps, the lack of presidential legisla-tion and interference to achieve equalization of the economic market is what lead to such downturns. President Hoover is known for having led the nation through economic hardships and is often held responsible for the Great Depression; how-ever, it was probably the policies of Coolidge that initiated the downturn. As such, a study of past policies and presidencies would, presumably, be beneficial in limit-ing and eliminating such vast periods of adversity. If Congress were to promote the President’s knowledge of historical economic context via his advisors, then perhaps his decisions would better suit the needs of Americans.

The proposed amendment of presidential economic education and an expansion of the CEA would likely only be successful in a free market economy, such as the one in the United States. Some economists, such as Elmira College Economics Professor Dr. Sharma, believe that a free market “ensures maximization of the social welfare” (Sharma). Despite the best interest of the majority of citizens, government action is, at times, necessary to ensure the nation’s benefit as a whole over the individual (Sharma). Interferences within the free market may be caused by the application of taxes, tax breaks, and/or mandates on a business’ operation. For example, if the government establishes a minimum wage for the benefit of the worker, the producer must either endure the loss or compensate for the increased expense in the price of his goods. While the ultimate price increase will benefit the bottom portion of the income spectrum, all consumers of the good will have to endure the price increase (Sharma). The increase in price will cause a decrease in the quantity of the product consumers demand, so a mandated minimum pay wage will, either way, be a detriment to the producer. By implementing a mandate on a business, the government could potentially cause the business financial losses. Although taxes are constitutional according to the Sixteenth Amendment, the prin-ciple of interfering with the market and imposing a burden on the business may be immoral; however, the interest of the nation’s citizens is typically more prominent as a larger portion of the nation is affected (Ginsberg and Ackerman 47). While a free market economy may allow for the greatest simultaneous benefit for both the consumer and producer, in times of financial crisis, the state of the entire nation’s economy is more important than the economic situations of individual firms.

The proposed amendment may necessitate the government to disregard private businesses’ liberties for the state of the nation’s economy as a whole. This principle relates to the idea that citizens’ rights may be compromised in the event

43

of a national crisis, as expressed in the elastic clause of Article I section 8 of the Constitution. In favor of the security of the entire nation, individual freedoms are often reduced; this is a main component of living in a democracy. In this case, the financial security and stability of the nation would outweigh the individual’s wishes. This may seem unconstitutional because of a disregard of the public’s opin-ion, but because the United States is a democracy, social welfare takes precedent over minority groups.

In times of economic hardship and distress, hasty decisions may be put into action without the consent of the public voter, or without serious thought about the consequences. By ensuring that the President have a background in eco-nomics and by allowing him to utilize professional advice via an expansion of the Council of Economic Advisers, the success rate of the many economic-government actions could be improved. As no education mandate is established to become the United States’ President, an economically ignorant citizen could be elected to the office and be in charge of the nation’s economy without even a basic knowledge of how to complete his own taxes. As the Council of Economic Advisers has been historically beneficial in its aid to the President, an expansion of the council would likewise, presumably, benefit the nation. Although the President will likely employ economic policies that favor the majority party and cause controversial side effects, ensuring that he have a good background in economics and diverse advisors on the CEA would help to ensure that he perform his duties with the good of all in mind. Therefore, the proposed amendment should be considered for adoption.

Works CitedAppleby, Joyce, Alan Brinkley, Albert S. Broussard, James M. McPherson, and Don-

ald A. Ritchie. The American Vision. New York: McGraw-Hill, 2003. Print: This book contains information about American history. This text was used while discussing the Great Depression and the Bush and Roosevelt administrations.

Brinkley, Alan. American History: a Survey. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1995. Print: This book provides a history of the United States. Most important to this paper is that the book outlines the complex sequence of events that caused the Great Depression.

Ginsberg, Benjamin and Erin Ackerman. A Guide to the United States Constitution. New York: Norton, 2007. Print: The Constitution contains the original ideals of the Founding Fathers. The text provides constitutional argu-ments for the amendment the essay proposes.

Hafer, Rik W. The Federal Reserve System: An Encyclopedia. Westport: Greenwood, 2005. Print: This book explains the Federal Reserve System and the Coun-cil of Economic Advisers, which the essay proposes to expand. The book was used for background information.

“The Real Enron Scandal.” New Republic 226.3 (2002): 7. Academic Search Complete. Web. 25 Nov. 2010: This article explains the collapse of Enron and the company’s ties to President Bush’s administration. This explanation is im-portant to the essay’s discussion of the causes of the current recession.

44

Romer, Christina D. “The Economic Crisis: Causes, Policies, and Outlook: Tes-timony Before the Joint Economic Committee, April 30, 2009.” White-House.gov. Web. 26 Nov. 2010: The causes of the most recent economic crisis are included in this testimony of Christina D. Romer, the Chair of the Council of Economic Advisers. This testimony supports this paper’s claim that political choices caused the most recent economic downturns.

Roubini, Nouriel. “The Current U.S. Recession and the Risks of a Systemic Finan-cial Crisis: Written Testimony for the House of Representatives’ Financial Services Committee Hearing on February 26th 2008.” The House Commit-tee on Financial Services. Web. 26 Nov. 2010: Roubini’s testimony includes ideas and principles behind the most recent economic and credit crisis. This testimony grounds the essay’s claim that political action led to the 2007-2010 economic crisis.

Sharma, Amarendra. “Chapter 5: Measuring Society’s Welfare.” Elmira College. Harris Hall, Elmira. 11 Oct. 2010. Lecture: This lecture advocates for the needs of the majority (the nation) over the rights of the minority. This principle is a building block for the essay’s proposed amendment.

Weidenbaum, Murray L. “The Role of the Council of Economic Advisers.” The Journal of Economic Education 19.3 (1988): 237-243. Print: This article ex-plains the role of the Council of Economic Advisers in society and the Ex-ecutive Branch. Because this essay proposes an expansion of the Council, this article was useful because it provides important information about the Council’s current responsibilities and structure.

Works ConsultedNeustadt, Richard. Presidential Power: the politics of leadership. New York: John Wi-

ley & Sons, 1960. Print: This book considers the problems that may oc-cur with the vast power that is allotted to the President. Neustadt’s text provides important points and counterpoints on the topic of expanding presidential responsibility, a topic that is important to this paper.

Parkin, Michael. Microeconomics. 9th ed. Boston: Addison-Wesley, 2010. Print: This book discusses the principle ideas of microeconomics, including defini-tions and the workings of the economy. Parkin’s explanations provide good background about economic terminology.

Prins, Gwyn, and Steve Rayner. “The Kyoto Protocol.” Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists 64.1 (2008): 45-58. Academic Search Complete. Web. 26 Nov. 2010: This article discusses President Bush’s decisions regarding the Kyoto Protocol, which is interesting to consider in the greater context of Bush’s controver-sial economic programs.

Mark Twain Writing Contest Winner

Elmira College has a special legacy from Mark Twain (Samuel Langhorne Clemens) and his family. Mark Twain’s wife, Olivia Langdon Clemens, was en-

45

rolled in the first academic class of Elmira College’s Preparatory School and was a member of the Class of 1864. Mark and Livy’s youngest daughter, Jean, attended the College’s Preparatory School in 1895. Furthermore, the Clemens’ niece, Dr. Ida Langdon, a respected teacher and scholar, was awarded an honorary degree from Elmira College in 1955, during the College’s Centennial year. Langdon Cot-tage, located near McGraw Hall, is named in her memory.

In honor of this literary legacy, the Elmira College Center for Mark Twain Studies annually invites students to enter the Mark Twain Writing Contest for the best creative or scholarly work on the subject of Mark Twain.

Dr. Barbara Snedecor, the Director of the Center for Mark Twain Studies, assembles a panel of judges to evaluate submissions to the contest. The winner is an-nounced at the Academic Honors and Student Recognition Banquet in the Spring. Over the years, several freshmen have won the contest, and we proudly include their essays in this text. This year we honor Paul Kappanadze ’14 and publish his winning essay, “An Unlikely Hero.” In this essay, which is based on The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn, the first book read in Term II, Paul adeptly argues that Huck is the unrecognized but more enduring hero in contrast to Tom Sawyer.

An Unlikely Heroby Paul Kappanadze ’14

The world of the hero is traditionally inhabited by strong men battling monsters and performing feats of sheer bravery and determination. This tradition-al, if not stereotypical, concept of a hero makes it difficult to perceive Mark Twain’s Huckleberry Finn as a heroic figure. In The Adventures of Tom Sawyer, Huck appears as a rough, uncivilized boy who is not to be trusted or associated with. In Huck’s own Adventures, however, Twain presents a Huck who undergoes a transformation. As the novel progresses, Huck becomes a hero in his own right. He is not, however, his community’s hero, this role being filled by Tom Sawyer. Instead, Huck’s defi-ance of the cultural and societal norms of his time designates him not only as a hero to those who held anti-slavery sentiments during Twain’s time, but also as a hero from the modern perspective.

When Huck makes his literary debut, he is by no means an admirable or heroic figure. In The Adventures of Tom Sawyer, Twain describes Huck as “the juvenile pariah of the village . . . [who] was cordially hated and dreaded by all mothers of the town, because he was idle, and lawless, and vulgar and bad” (47). He is indeed a waif whose lack of a present father figure allows him to go where and do what he pleases. His lack of parental influence has made him independent of social norms, causing him to be in need of “sivilizing” by the Widow Douglas. He finds no need for living in a house, learning the Bible, going to school, or even wearing new or little-worn clothes. Huck’s world is one of hogsheads, rags, and, essentially, free-dom (Tom Sawyer 13). In his own Adventures, he continues to reveal that he is not satisfied with submitting to society’s rigid and uncomfortable ways. Even when he is confined to a shanty by Pap, he must escape. He is not free with Pap constantly

46

beating him and locking him up for long periods of time. Although he is free from the constraining environment dominated by Miss Watson and the Widow, he is still restricted and is not free to do as he pleases. This quest for freedom ultimately leads Huck to fake his own death and to escape Pap and society altogether, a feat that demonstrates his cleverness.

After his escape from Pap, Huck’s fateful meeting of Jim on Jackson Is-land sets in motion the course of events that shape the rest of Twain’s novel and Huck’s development into a hero. When Huck learns that Jim has run away from Miss Watson, he keeps his word not to turn him in, even though “[p]eople would call [him] a low down Abolitionist and despise [him]” (55). Since this makes no difference to Huck because he has no plan to return to town, the basis of this rela-tionship is founded. Huck, however, is still juvenile in his outlook. For example, as they journey on the river, Huck and Jim regularly steal vegetables and other food, even chickens. Huck’s justification for this comes from the worst role model ever, Pap. Huck learned from his father that merely “borrowing” things does no harm, and he combines this understanding with the Widow’s moralizing influence when he rationalizes stealing certain items by never taking the same item twice. This, of course, is a child’s view of the world.

Huck’s immaturity is also evident when he convinces Jim that their separa-tion in the fog was a dream. In his introduction to Huckleberry Finn, T.S. Eliot re-marks on how Huck does this in an “impulse of [his] boyish mischief” (351). Huck, however, is soon humbled by Jim, who emphasizes the immaturity of his action. Jim was emotionally distraught at Huck’s absence, yet, according to Jim, “all [Huck] wuz thinkin’ bout wuz how you could make a fool uv ole Jim wid a lie. Dat truck dah is trash; en trash is what people is dat put dirt on de head er dey fren’s en makes ’em ashamed” (Huck Finn 95). Eliot goes on to note that Huck eventually apologizes to Jim because he is “reminded so humbly and humiliatingly, that his position in the world is not that of other boys, entitled from time to time to a practical joke.” He is realizing that he must bear, as Eliot writes, “the responsibility of a man” (351). This realization marks a further development in Huck’s transformation. Having basically agreed to help Jim by agreeing not to tell on him, he now understands that, even if he had not originally intended it to be so monumental, the task before him is not fit for a boy, revealing a change from the seemingly detestable boy of Tom Sawyer to an admirable character who has taken on a serious, dangerous mission. He now realizes that his decision not to tell was a very important one and that he must bear the responsibility of such a decision.

Another key incident in Huck’s development as a hero is his interference in the Duke and Dauphin’s plan to steal the money from the Wilks sisters. He could easily allow these frauds to rob the poor sisters blind and leave them with nothing, and it is probable that the Huck of several chapters ago would have thought noth-ing of the matter. At this point in the novel, however, Huck has a much more fully developed conscience that prompts him to act. As he meets the Wilks sisters, he is constantly thinking of how he is allowing the Duke and Dauphin to rob them. As the sisters “laid themselves out to make [Huck] feel at home, ” Huck feels himself among friends and feels “so ornery and low down and mean, that [he] says to [him-

47

self], My mind’s made up; I’ll hive that money for them or bust” (Huck Finn 188). He can no longer allow himself to be party to this shameless crime, so he steals the money from the Duke and Dauphin so that the sisters might find it later. Making the decision that many heroes make, he sets himself to do the right thing. Once again, this is a departure from the Huck Finn who digs for buried treasure or steals chickens and melons. Faced with the plight of others, he realizes his ability to help and acts accordingly out of a basic moral consciousness that considers neither so-ciety nor fame.

The climax of Huck’s heroic development comes when he finally decides to help Jim escape from the Phelps’ farm after the Duke and Dauphin turn him in. This decision, though, does not come easy to Huck. To Huck, helping Jim escape from the Phelps’ farm is different and more horrible than simply not telling on Jim when he escaped on his own, and this is because Huck has been influenced by cultural beliefs. Even though Huck has spent most of his life avoiding society, he is nonetheless a product of his culture. The same conscience that could not allow him to stand by as the Wilks sisters were robbed gnaws at him for “stealing a poor old woman’s nigger that hadn’t ever done [Huck] no harm” (Huck Finn 222). Despite the trials and adventures Huck experiences with Jim, he realizes that, according to the understanding of his time, it is a damnable offence to do what he plans. He is convinced that it is morally reprehensible to set a slave free, yet he knows he would be lying if he prayed to give up this sin. In a sense, his conscience acts in a double way. At first it assures him that he is transgressing God’s providence by freeing Jim, but it also requires him to consider that Jim is a human being who also deserves freedom.

Huck’s decision reveals his heroism because it shows him facing the ulti-mate conflict his society has ingrained in him. Since Huck cannot deny the influ-ence of his culture, he writes a letter telling Miss Watson where her slave is, but then he has a change of heart that is influenced not just by conscience but by human emotion. After he writes the letter, he recalls his journey with Jim down the river and remembers all that Jim did for him. He sees Jim “standing my watch on top of his’n, stead of calling me — so I could go on sleeping; and see him how glad he was when I come back to him again in the swamp . . . and would always call me honey, and pet me, and do everything he could think of for me” (223). He finally recalls how he saved Jim by telling two men there was smallpox on the raft and how Jim said Huck was the best friend he had in the world (223). This recollection of a human connection pushes Huck to make his most heroic admission: “All right, then, I’ll go to hell” (223). He makes the excruciatingly difficult decision to defy all that he knows to be right and to help Jim escape from slavery once and for all. The immature waif is now totally gone. He is no longer concerned with freedom from the Widow and Pap, but with helping a person with whom he made a bond. With manly acceptance of his perceived fate, Huck decides to do something that no boy could do.

Huck’s decision draws attention to the circumstantial nature of his hero-ism. In the 19th century white South, he would have been a contemptible person who had performed an unimaginably illegal and detestable act. Most people would

48

have condemned Huck to Hell as a “low down Abolitionist and despise[d] [him]” (Huck Finn 55). In the cultural context of his time, Huck is as far from a hero as any one person could be. Although he would be a hero to those who held anti-slavery sentiments during Twain’s time, he is not the popular societal hero nor the hero of his community. Unlike Tom Sawyer, he does not lead Becky Thatcher out of a cave or help accuse a murderer. Although Huck is involved in finding the treasure that makes him and Tom rich, Tom Sawyer is the hero in the context of his and Huck’s time because he does things that gain him heroic status and fame; he, a simpler hero, upholds the status quo and his society’s expectations.

Huck, however, is a more complex hero as well as a hero in modern terms. In a modern context, Huck defied the unjust status quo that governed his society. He went against a system that is now seen as morally reprehensible. If he had sent the letter to Miss Watson, modern readers would judge him as a disappointing char-acter who went through many challenges only to give in to a racist way of thinking. Risking his life for Jim and consigning himself to immortal condemnation, Huck goes against every fiber of his being to make a decision that would seem so obvious today, and he does so without a desire for recognition or fame. This, in modern terms, is a real hero.

From the beginning, Huck Finn is an unlikely hero. His early antics in Tom Sawyer paint him as a disliked boy whose upbringing has rendered him uncivi-lized, and his rebelliousness in the beginning of his Adventures and his immature antics on the river do nothing to establish him as a heroic figure. However, when Jim upbraids him for his practical joke on the raft, his character begins to shift to a more serious understanding of the task at hand. He realizes that the time for fun has passed and that he must consider the gravity of what he is doing. As his heroism develops, so does his conscience. When he helps the Wilks sisters, his conscience makes him act. Ultimately, his conscience, while emphasizing the apparent evil of actions, drives him to help Jim escape once and for all. Although he is not the immediate hero praised by society, hindsight demonstrates the utter and enduring heroic nature of his brave, yet unlikely act.

Works CitedEliot, T.S. “Introduction to Adventures of Huckleberry Finn.” The Adventures of Huckle-

berry Finn. By Mark Twain. Ed. Thomas Cooley. New York: Norton, 1999. 348-354. Print.

Twain, Mark. The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn. Ed. Thomas Cooley. New York: Norton, 1999. Print.

---. The Adventures of Tom Sawyer. Ed. Paul Baender. Berkeley: U of California P, 1980. Print.

Term II Analytical Responses to Selected Texts

During Term II, students read texts focusing on the term’s theme of pro-tecting and improving the polis. Students responded to these texts in various ways,

49

some taking a more traditional analytical approach and some a more creative ap-proach. In this section, we present critical responses to three of the texts: Leonardo da Vinci’s Notebooks, Lord Chesterfield’s Letters to His Son, and a collection entitled Never Give In!: The Best of Winston Churchill’s Speeches. The essays presented here take varying positions on their topics, but all present arguments that build on the argumentative strategies learned in Term I.

Leonardo da Vinci’s Notebooks

This book contains a collection of Leonardo da Vinci’s sketches and notes about various topics, including art, anatomy, science, and engineering, among oth-er interests. The text highlights the rebirth of critical thinking that occurred during the Renaissance and continues in liberal arts education today. Students were en-gaged by da Vinci’s diverse pursuits and how those pursuits informed his contribu-tions to Western culture. Reading this work allowed them the opportunity to write papers in which they analyzed da Vinci’s theories through the filter of their own interests. The two papers presented here do exactly that. In “Leonardo: An Artistic Visionary,” Katie Budd ’14 explores how da Vinci used specific artistic techniques to create realistic paintings that elicit an emotional and analytical response from the viewer. In “Leonardo da Vinci’s Use of Mathematics in Art,” Roman Kononenko ’14 examines how da Vinci employs mathematical principles to create precise and visually appealing art.

Leonardo: An Artistic Visionaryby Katie Budd ’14

The Renaissance emphasized religion and the arts, and introduced the world to renowned intellectuals such as Leonardo da Vinci. Though da Vinci made enormous contributions in a variety of areas, his art remains his most defining and acknowledged talent. His ability to represent figures with the utmost realism while simultaneously maintaining a deeper level of meaning has captured the attention and admiration of millions. Because he created such enduring works, da Vinci has remained an important figure. He introduced many of the painting styles and tech-niques we associate with the Renaissance and renewed the emphasis on symbolism in art, all while maintaining his focus on realism.

The Renaissance saw the emergence of many new painting techniques, in-cluding the very popular sfumato style. The Italian word sfumato means vanishing or shading, which is exactly the effect this style brings to artwork. Many historians and art critics credit Leonardo da Vinci with the invention of this method, recognizing it most prominently in the Mona Lisa. The effects of sfumato on a painting allow for the image to appear more realistic and almost weathered. Though this procedure is often confused with others for the similar effects produced, sfumato painting is conducted rather specifically. The artist must alternate between coats of translucent

50

dark shades and opaque light shades to create the intended effect. A painter using this method hopes to cover his art with a dimming shadow that lessens the intensity of bright areas while also accentuating the light in the darker areas. Sfumato thus provides a more balanced appearance to the objects of the painting than does an extreme contrast between light and dark. The Mona Lisa, known for the very subtle expression of emotion in the maiden’s countenance, deserves much of its atten-tion specifically for the manner in which her figure is presented. Da Vinci’s use of sfumato’s gentle shading causes viewers to perceive her features as soft and gentle, at-tracting an audience to her calming gaze and presence in the portrait. Upon careful review of the painting, viewers recognize no actual lines in the woman’s face, only shadowing and shading to show dimensional features. The wonder of the Mona Lisa would be lost if harsh, definitive lines replaced the smooth transitions of color and shading that produce her facial features.

Though it has been more popularized in the works of Rembrandt, Leon-ardo da Vinci also frequently utilized the Renaissance style of chiaroscuro. Despite frequent confusion with sfumato, this technique actually produces opposite results. Chiaroscuro provides extreme contrasts between light and dark rather than a blend-ing of shadows. Works of art that employ this method intend to direct and focus the viewer’s attention specifically to the subject of the painting, or sometimes even to specific parts of the subject. Although chiaroscuro is occasionally referred to as “natural lighting,” it actually produces a seemingly less realistic or natural appear-ance because of unequal distribution or direction of lighting. However, when used appropriately, chiaroscuro may clearly define shapes and dramatize lighting in art. Da Vinci most commonly uses this technique within his sketches. While sfumato works efficiently with paints that blend and mix easily, ink or graphite drawings are better mediums of chiaroscuro shading.

Da Vinci acknowledged the importance of lighting to an object’s defini-tion even while sketching, which led him to create the “natural lighting” effect in his drawings. Dark and definitive lines forming the shapes of figures characterize this representation of contrast between the brightness and darkness of a sketch. In addition to these lines, shadowing darkens and deepens more suddenly and intensely than with the more gentle and gradual blending of light into shadow used in sfumato. Da Vinci’s sketch of a horse (123) clearly illustrates this practice, as dark lines form the figure of the horse and deep shading develops the muscular definition of the animal. Thousands of artists use these same techniques, but da Vinci’s unique genius and talent lies in his ability to match these effects with the perceptions and emotions he intended his viewers to experience, a fact that made him stand out from his contemporaries and which allows him to continue to in-trigue us today.

Along with the Renaissance “rebirth” of art came a revitalization of sym-bolism and deeper meanings within artistic creations. Da Vinci, along with the other great artists of his time, led this movement toward more meaningful artwork. For example, when witnessing the Mona Lisa, spectators find themselves lost in the woman’s gaze and bewildered by her ambiguous expression. As mentioned, the absence of definitive lines in her face creates a soft, gentle appearance and leaves

51

an impression of calmness and serenity. As viewers, we rely on her expression to divulge the secrets behind the painting, but her lips appear stuck between the seri-ousness of a straight face and the happiness of a smile. Her expression as a whole implies that she is generally optimistic and content, but closer examination of the eyes and smile imply confusion and uncertainty. The alluring direction of her gaze puzzles viewers who struggle to interpret which emotions might appear visible in her eyes. While the Mona Lisa’s true emotions in this portrait remain a mystery, da Vinci succeeded in exhibiting the popularity and attractiveness of symbolism to a curious audience. Hence, even the most unsolvable mysteries of symbolic art never lose their captivating intrigue and appeal to the human desire for explanation.

Another detailed symbolic expression of da Vinci’s art can be found with-in his collection of sketches. The notes accompanying da Vinci’s sketch of Virtue and Envy (127) exemplify his insightful representation of Envy as an oppositional response to the presence of Virtue in the world. His illustration displays a woman riding upon the back of a skeleton and gesturing towards the heavens, representing her undying love of rule and control and her desire to target God with her pow-ers. Da Vinci’s own description reveals the symbolic meaning of each aspect of the drawing:

Show her as wounded in the eye by a palm branch and by an olive branch, and wounded in the ear by laurel and myrtle, to sig-nify that victory and truth are odious to her. Many thunderbolts should proceed from her to signify her evil speaking. Let her be lean and haggard because she is in perpetual torment. Make her heart gnawed by a swelling serpent, and make her with a quiver and with tongues serving as arrows, because she offends with it. (127)

Using incredible detail, da Vinci seems to cover every aspect of Envy and bring these characteristics forth in an attempt to humanize her into an actual form. He brings the idea of Envy to life by creating her as a wounded and damaged being set on spreading her own destruction. Da Vinci’s abilities of symbolic representation intensify the viewer’s interest and develop art into something more than simply the presentation of entertaining pictures.

Da Vinci’s most defining characteristic as an artist was his distinct concern with representing everything as realistically as possible. The images portrayed in da Vinci’s portraits, landscapes, and sketches all combine his multiple techniques for realistic portrayal. Every figure in his paintings is proportional, and every bit of shading and shadowing has been carefully calculated as to what angle and depth is appropriate for the lighting. Da Vinci exemplifies his concern for appropriate placement of shadows in his art with his diagram featuring various points of light and shadow (79). He estimated and calculated the shadows cast by objects as well as the shadowing on an object itself. By developing this skill, da Vinci represented the subjects in his paintings as though they were living, tangible things, just as real as the viewer of the painting. Drawings of horses and babies show the use of shadows as defining tools, giving animals the muscular structure and shape that we would find on a real horse, and children the chubby rolls we expect to see on an infant.

52

Da Vinci explains throughout his Notebooks his strategies for representing the human form as exactly as possible. His measurements led him to conclusions of proportionality in the structure of the human body, which he followed closely in his drawings and paintings. His research went further to study the body in motion as well as at rest. He understood the muscular movements and changes in shape and definition between the resting and mobile states of the body. Using this knowledge, he realistically illustrated movements by drawing figures in motion, as well as show-ing the body’s muscular response to that motion. Da Vinci’s extreme concern with honest and realistic presentation in his art defined him as an artist.

Art is a definitive expression of the artist himself. Respected for his in-quisitiveness, Leonardo da Vinci introduced various new painting techniques and reintroduced the use of symbolism in art during his period of influence, and he did all of this with scientific precision. Playing off of his and his audience’s natural cu-riosity and need for explanation, he helped to revive artistic appreciation, and this revival occurs again with each new generation that is exposed to his works. Da Vinci proves to us that natural curiosity can lead to great things. Because of his curiosity, he set himself apart from other artists of his time, and he remains one of the most important artists of all time.

Works CitedDa Vinci, Leonardo. Leonardo’s Notebooks. Ed. H. Anna Suh. New York: Black Dog

and Leventhal, 2005. Print.

Leonardo da Vinci’s Use of Mathematics in Artby Roman Kononenko ’14

Many people consider Leonardo da Vinci one of the greatest artists of the Renaissance, and this reputation continues today. What many do not realize, how-ever, is that da Vinci was such a successful and revolutionary artist because he care-fully constructed his works using scientific precision. One of the reasons so many of da Vinci’s paintings feel real and vivid is his meticulous use of various math-ematical principles. An examination of da Vinci’s painting as well as his numerous sketches and claims in his Notebooks reveals that da Vinci employed three important mathematical tools to create his works: calculation of the distance concerning light sources, perspective, and the Golden Ratio.

The first mathematical tool da Vinci employed was a combination of light and shade to create a feeling of volumetric objects. In the third section of part one of his Notebooks, he discusses the way light and shade must to be taken into account when drawing a picture. Da Vinci was one of the first artists to realize the impor-tance of understanding how the distance of an object from a light source influences the way shadows fall around it, and this helped him create unparalleled true-to-life pictures. To create his works, da Vinci first had to employ rigid mathematical tools, in particular geometry, to measure the distance from the imaginary source of light to the object in an image. For every image, he had to draw a straight line to

53

the imaginary source of light and then calculate how much further away the light source might be. For example, in a sketch for The Last Supper, we can clearly see that he creates an imaginary source of light somewhere outside of the image and then measures the distance from that light source to the actual object in the painting by drawing straight lines in the direction of the imaginary source of light (106-109). Consequently, he draws shadows that take into account that light source, which gives all the objects in the painting volume.

In conjunction with volume and light, da Vinci valued perspective. He saw the importance of perspective and vantage point and realized that he needed both to make his images life-like. He writes in his Notebooks that without a clear understanding of the concept of perspective, a painter cannot be seen as great (92-103). Furthermore, da Vinci not only realized the importance of using perspective and detecting the exact position of a vantage point, but he also realized that it is important to understand how our eye perceives it. He claims that when it becomes darker, the eye’s pupil gets larger in exact mathematical proportion to the amount of darkness that surrounds it (102). He then used this knowledge to create life-like images in his paintings.

Da Vinci claims the human eye is the key to understanding the concept of perspective. According to da Vinci, the laws of perspective are a condition of the existence of objects in space and the manner in which the eye perceives them. This may be explained in mathematical terms: “All things transmit their image to the eye by means of pyramids; the nearer to the eye these are intersected the smaller the image of their cause will appear” (101). Da Vinci constantly tries to connect the science and the art by giving a scientific explanation for why a certain object should be painted a certain way. For example, when he discusses his understanding of what vision is, he observes that an eye will see an object as smaller at night and larger during the day. He also claims that we retain in our memory the images we perceive with our eyes. He says “the eye — which sees all objects reversed — retains the images for some time. This conclusion is proved by the results; because, the eye having gazed at light retains some impression of it” (100). In effect, because of his work in mathematics and his understanding of how the eye perceives objects, including art, da Vinci was able to use perspective to add dimension to his paintings.

The third, and arguably the most valuable, mathematical tool that da Vinci used is the Golden Ratio, sometimes called the Divine Proportion. In his Notebooks, da Vinci sketches a Vitruvian man, which would later become one of the most prominent pictures to feature an explicit use of the Golden Ratio (12). Here, da Vinci tries to depict the perfect proportions of the human body; everything in the sketch is proportioned in accordance with the Golden Ratio. The rectangle and circle are employed to try to position legs, hands, the head, and other parts of a hu-man body so that they correspond with the ratio of 1.61 (the Golden Ratio).

Another example that illustrates the use of the Golden Ratio can be found later in the Notebooks, where da Vinci depicts a profile picture of a man’s face cov-ered with many kinds of mathematical numbers (109). On the bottom of his chin, there is a measuring line that was probably intended for the purpose of discovering the exact distance between the ears and the nose or some other part of a face. (It is

54

also interesting to note that since there were no meter-tapes to measure the exact distances on the line he drew, da Vinci had to judge those distances by hand). Here, we can see that da Vinci was aware that in order to achieve a near perfect Golden Ratio, one has to know the exact distance from various separate objects on a man’s face.

One can see that da Vinci was interested in including the elements of mathematics in his works and that these elements make his work much more re-alistic and interesting. For his art, mathematics and painting are inseparable con-cepts. Important concepts like the Golden Ratio, perspective, and vantage point ultimately allowed da Vinci to create some of the most aesthetically pleasing works of art that mankind has ever produced, and his work in both mathematics and art has served as inspiration for generations.

Works CitedDa Vinci, Leonardo. Leonardo’s Notebooks. Ed. H. Anna Suh. New York: Black Dog

and Leventhal, 2005. Print.

Lord Chesterfield’s Letters to His Son

This text is a collection of letters written by Philip Dormer Stanhope, Earl of Chesterfield to his son while the son was studying abroad. In these letters, Chesterfield offers much advice about how to live prosperously and with deco-rum, while also finding a balance and enjoying life. Students were interested in this text because it had valuable applications to their experience as freshmen beginning their own studies and forming their own identities as young adults. Students also enjoyed comparing the advice Chesterfield gives his son to the type of advice they have received themselves. In their papers extending from these letters, students considered the nature of effective advice. The first paper presented here, Zachary Barbour ’14’s “Can Your Father Be Your Friend?: The Theme of Friendship in Lord Chesterfield’s Letters,” examines why young adults should maintain close relation-ships with their parents. The second paper, “The Importance of Tone,” by Elizabeth Morgan ’14, examines the value of anecdotes in advice-giving.

Can Your Father Be Your Friend?The Theme of Friendship in Lord Chesterfield’s Letters

by Zachary Barbour ’14

Throughout his Letters to His Son on the Art of Becoming a Man of the World and a Gentleman, Lord Chesterfield outlines many of the important qualities a true friend possesses. Society usually dictates that our friends and our parents are two separate circles, but Lord Chesterfield challenges this ideal. He demonstrates that we commonly mislabel our peers as our only friends simply due to our closeness in age. Although these people can share a close bond with us, they often lack the abil-

55

ity to be our true friends because they cannot provide leadership or advice when we need it. In Chesterfield’s view, our parents serve as better friends because they can offer us such leadership and advice; they can guide us in ways other friends cannot and they do so solely for our gain. Therefore, Chesterfield advises that children consider parents some of their closest friends.

Cicero says “There is nothing which causes people to display worse care-lessness, pay graver penalties, than their selection and acquisition of friends” (218). To avoid such penalties, when selecting our friends, we should take Lord Chester-field’s advice and label our parents as our closest friends because we can learn from our parents’ experiences and mistakes. Although many may not regard their parents as true friends due to the difference in age, Lord Chesterfield explains that this gap is necessary for true friendship to develop. Chesterfield claims that peers cannot provide proper advice for one another: “The young leading the young, is like the blind leading the blind; (they will both fall into the ditch)” (34). In other words, peers cannot provide leadership because both parties have an equal understanding of the world. Chesterfield is correct in this observation because, in true friendship, one party must be able to provide sound advice to the other. Because they are more experienced, parents can provide quality advice to their children. As Chesterfield says, a parent has “gone [down] all roads, and . . . can consequently point out to you the best” (35). Because our parents have the life experience to offer true insight on many situations, our parents should be regarded as our closest friends.

Furthermore, we should view our parents as our true friends because they offer leadership not for personal gain, but out of true love and devotion to their children. Many relationships between peers develop in order for one of the parties to gain advantage or prestige. Although these friendships may bring wealth or an el-evated position in society, once stress is placed on the friendship, the friendship will most always fail. Lord Chesterfield shows how our relationship with our parents is not forged for this purpose. Instead, parents seek friendship with their children purely out of love; thus, no stress is placed on the relationship that would cause the friendship to cease. Through Lord Chesterfield’s letters to his son, he draws atten-tion to the selfless nature of the father-son relationship. He says that “if you should deserve either a good or a bad character, mine will be exactly what it is now, and will neither be the better in the first case nor worse in the latter” (35). Through forging a friendship with his son on these grounds, he demonstrates the fundamental self-lessness required of true friendship. Although many dismiss the idea of friendship with parents, this type of friendship is purest in form because parents require no personal gain from the friendship. Instead, the parents’ actions are out of love and genuine concern for their offspring. Due to the selfless commitment of our parents, we should regard them as our closest friends.

Lastly, a child should befriend his or her parents because this relationship is not limited. All the experiences from the parents’ lives, whether good or taboo, can be applied to better the child’s life. Although some topics may be deemed awkward between parent and child, all experience, no matter how explicit, can be applied in the child’s life. Despite the uncomfortable nature of some discussions, making a subject taboo may be highly detrimental to the child. If a parent feels that

56

he or she cannot share an experience based on the nature of the experience, the child then may not know to avoid a potentially dangerous or negative experience. Lord Chesterfield shows the importance of discussing negative experience by saying “if you ask me why I went any of the bad roads myself, I will answer you very truly. That is for want of a better guide: ill example invited me one way, and a good guide was wanting to show me a better” (35). Chesterfield has learned first-hand that we learn best from others’ experiences, and he wishes that his father had been more open about his own childhood. If parents refrain from limiting the topics they discuss with their children, they will be able to help them avoid potentially harmful situations and will provide the type of leadership that true friends provide.

According to Lord Chesterfield, our parents should be our closest friends because they can offer advice based on experience and because they are truly in-terested in our success. Although friendships between parents and children may be viewed as unconventional, this relationship can greatly benefit the child’s de-velopment. Unlike friendships with our peers, which may be formed under false pretenses, our parents offer their guidance purely out of love. Due to this selfless-ness, parents will provide the best advice possible and will support their children through all circumstances. For this reason, children should value the friendship of their parents.

Works CitedCicero, Marcus Tullius. On the Good Life. Trans. Michael Grant. New York: Pen-

guin, 1971. Print.Stanhope, Philip Dormer [Lord Chesterfield]. Letters to His Son on the Art of Becom-

ing a Man of the World and a Gentleman, 1746-47. Lexington: Hard Press, 2010. Print.

The Importance of Toneby Elizabeth Morgan ’14

For parents, giving advice to their children is difficult because, while chil-dren usually like to impress their parents, they do not like to be bossed around. Being corrected can make a child feel inadequate. Therefore, if parents wish for children to follow their advice, they must deliver the advice with care. In Letters to His Son on the Art of Becoming a Man of the World and a Gentleman, 1746-47, Lord Chesterfield does a remarkable job of conveying his advice to his son, and one letter in particular, Letter VII, illustrates the proper tone a parent must use if he wishes his son to follow his advice. The letter is successful because the tone is reflective, trusting, and void of orders or codes of conduct. Instead of bossing his son, Ches-terfield gives examples from his own youth and shows how his son could benefit from following his advice.

In Letter VII, Chesterfield is trying to persuade his son not to drink, gam-ble, or swear excessively. Yet, rather than overtly delivering this advice, he gives hints without ordering his son to do something specific. Chesterfield reminds his son

57

that “I wish you a great deal [of pleasure]; and my only view is to hinder you from mistaking it” (15). He then goes on to explain what appropriate pleasure is, but he maintains that it is up to the son to decide what to do. By bestowing upon his son permission to make his own decisions, Chesterfield allows him to feel liberated. In addition, because Chesterfield allows his son to make his own choices, his son will feel that the decision is entirely his own. Therefore, if he chooses to follow his father’s advice, he does not have to give up any pride or maturity to do so.

Beyond permission, Chesterfield uses examples to justify his claims. He gives examples of misfortunes and mistakes from his youth: “the same as to gam-ing, I did not want money, and consequently had no occasion to play for it; but I thought play another necessary ingredient in the composition of a man of pleasure, and accordingly I plunged into it without desire, at first; sacrificed a thousand real pleasures to it; and made myself solidly uneasy by it, for . . . the best years of my life” (15). By giving an example of his mistakes, demonstrating what his mistakes cost him, and making himself seem foolish for making the mistakes, Chesterfield gives his son reasons to avoid trouble. This is a more effective technique than sim-ply demanding that his son not do something. By giving examples from his own experiences, he allows his son to make his own choices but also to learn from his father’s mistakes.

All in all, Chesterfield wrote an exceptional letter that includes all the important characteristics of advice and demonstrates an understanding of how a parent must give advice to a child. The letter has to be respectful and it must reveal to the child the positive consequences of choosing to follow the advice and the negative consequences of choosing not to follow it. Ultimately, though, this letter reveals that the best advice is the kind that is not demanding, the kind that gives the child choices but allows him to make his own decisions. If the tone is correct, it is more likely that the child will respond positively and follow the advice.

Works CitedStanhope, Philip Dormer [Lord Chesterfield]. Letters to His Son on the Art of Becom-

ing a Man of the World and a Gentleman, 1746-47. Lexington: Hard Press, 2010. Print.

Never Give In!: The Best of Winston Churchill’s Speeches

This collection, edited by Winston Churchill’s grandson, presents patri-otic and motivational speeches by Churchill, who was British Prime Minister dur-ing World War II. In our course, we focused on the speeches given during the war years, and students were asked to write about the speeches they found most inspiring. Here we present analyses of two of Churchill’s speeches. Both of these papers do an excellent job of exploring the techniques Churchill used to elicit a response from his audience. In “Honesty and Emotion in the Speeches of Winston Churchill,” Natasha Wagner ’14 examines how Churchill used questions, honesty, and repetition to inspire the House of Commons to give him a vote of confidence

58

when things were looking uncertain. In “Churchill’s Speeches as Morale Boosters,” Skyler Duncan ’14 discusses how Churchill expands on the now well-known theme of “never surrender.”

Emotion and Honesty in the Speeches of Winston Churchillby Natasha Wagner ’14

Sir Winston Churchill gave his speech “I Demand a Vote of Confidence” on January 27, 1942 after he hurriedly returned to England because the British in Singapore were surrounded and a German commander was invading North Africa in an attempt to take the Suez Canal. These events forced Churchill to ask for a vote of confidence from the House of Commons. In the speech, Churchill inspires the members of Parliament to give him their support by persuading them that events are severe and need to be treated as such, but he is confident that Britain cannot back down from the challenge. He uses his now-famous rhetorical questions, hon-esty, and, repetition to accomplish this task.

Churchill begins his speech by stating that there are things “which must be clarified” (325). Even while asking for a vote of confidence, Churchill wants a de-bate about the war because he believes it is the duty of the members of Parliament to actively criticize and advise the government so that it can complete tasks to the best of its ability. Churchill uses rhetorical questions to show the importance of free government when he asks, “Could you have anything freer than that? Could you have any higher expression of democracy than that? Very few other countries have institutions strong enough to sustain such a thing while they are fighting for their lives” (325). These questions show the members of Parliament just how fortunate they are to be able to share their opinions because citizens of many other countries do not have such freedoms. Throughout his wartime speeches, Churchill asked his people to understand that this type freedom was what they were fighting for and that it was something they could lose if Nazi Germany were to defeat them.

Churchill goes on to say that he knows his words will be broadcast to enemy nations who, wishing to see the downfall of Britain, might see his words as weakness. However, he says that this is exactly why he needs a vote of confidence as support from his government and his people. He is very honest when he says, “it is because things have gone badly and worse is to come that I demand a Vote of Con-fidence” (326). Churchill never hid the facts from his people or from Parliament, and this speech illustrates this fact. Here, he does not hide the fact that things were going badly. Instead, he is forthright and honest to ensure that Parliament truly understands what is occurring and can therefore make the correct decisions in their debate. By telling them the truth, he not only informs them, but he also inspires them to make changes that will strengthen and improve the fate of the nation.

To strengthen his points in this speech, Churchill employs repetition in a few points, one of which is when he repeats the words “so many” (329). This technique enhances his ideas and makes his speech even more effective and inspir-ing. We are all familiar with Churchill’s famous “never give in” speech, in which

59

he repeats the phrase “never give in” several times to make his point. The audience listening to that speech would have been moved by the effect of the repetition of those words, just as the audience of this speech, the members of Parliament, would have been moved by this speech to give Churchill exactly what he wanted, a vote of confidence. The repetition enhances the emotion and honesty of the speech.

As a leader, Winston Churchill was honest and forthright with his people, but he did not depress them. In his speeches, which rely heavily on features such as rhetorical questions and repetition, he uplifts their spirits and shows them that, while the path to victory may not be easy, the path is there. Churchill’s “Vote of Confidence” speech to Parliament is just one example of the speeches that reveal how Churchill was able to inspire the people of Great Britain and lead them to vic-tory while also maintaining a level and realistic head.

Works CitedChurchill, Winston S. “I Demand a Vote of Confidence.” Never Give In!: The Best

of Winston Churchill’s Speeches. New York: Hyperion, 2003. 324-329. Print.

Churchill’s Speeches as Morale Boostersby Skyler Duncan ’14

Winston Churchill was an extraordinary leader of Great Britain and is known for his contributions to his country during World War II. He was a pivotal figure during a time of mass genocide and destruction, and he proved to be a posi-tive public figure not only for his own country but for the entire world. One of Churchill’s notable abilities was his exquisite mastery of public speaking, which cap-tured the hearts of his people. His speeches were patriotic and genuine, arguing that the greater good shall always overcome adversity, no matter how dire the situation seems. These speeches are well-known and still invoke good morale and patriotism in all who read them. One of Churchill’s inspirational speeches that represents the heart of his philosophy is “We Will All Go Down Fighting to the End,” delivered to the House of Commons on September 17, 1940. As it displays Churchill’s deter-mination to strike down Nazi forces, this speech also boosts morale and reveals a theme common to many of the speeches: never surrender.

Throughout this short speech, Churchill makes it apparent that the Nazi forces were large and diligent in their strategy. Always the truth-teller, Churchill admits that “these next few weeks are grave and anxious,” and he describes in detail the enemy’s plans to embark on ships to invade Great Britain, utilizing their mas-sive navy. (254). Churchill was not afraid to admit that the Nazi forces were a threat and should not be thought of lightly, but he refused to believe that they would have any chance in conquering the people of Great Britain. He says, “I am confident that we shall succeed in defeating and largely destroying this most tremendous onslaught by which we are now threatened” (254). The British forces’ consistent counterstrike bombings on the awaiting Nazi ships had significantly weakened the fleet and it was unclear if the Nazis still planned to invade, but Churchill remained steadfast

60

in his plan to further diminish the enemy’s units if they approached Great Britain with the intent to invade. His words reveal the theme that resonates throughout his wartime speeches: acknowledge the enemy’s strength, but do not buckle to it.

In this speech, Churchill promises to make every step of the enemy’s inva-sion as difficult as possible, whether it be by attacking the fleet while they are being transported, cutting off supply ships, or further attacking the enemy by plane; he gives great detail in this speech about how he plans to face the enemy. Such detail would undoubtedly instill confidence in his people but also keep them on guard. Churchill wanted his people to stay ready because it was unknown when the Nazi fleet would strike, but he also believed that the British people would never surren-der. He says, “whatever happens, we will all go down fighting to the end. I feel as sure as the sun will rise tomorrow that we shall be victorious” (254). He inspires his people with his strong words and his faith that victory will be inevitable. Churchill’s constant insistence on victory in spite of the odds reveals the type of inspiration we still admire him for today.

Inspiring people is a difficult task because one must connect with and mo-tivate the people addressed. Winston Churchill was a master of inspiration because he made it clear he believed in his people. He never doubted their willingness to fight nor their patriotism. The British did not want to let Churchill down because he believed in their ability to bring about the greater good. His success as a speaker was facilitated by his ability to relate, motivate, inspire, and invoke confidence in his people. He was one of the greatest leaders in history and should be valued as a role-model for modern leaders.

Works CitedChurchill, Winston S. “We Will All Go Down Fighting to the End.” Never Give

In!: The Best of Winston Churchill’s Speeches. New York: Hyperion, 2003. 253-254. Print.

Term II Creative Responses to Texts

In addition to analytical responses, students this year were given the op-portunity to respond to texts creatively and to imagine what the authors involved would say to one another in a conversation about power, one of the sub-topics of Term II.

The first paper presented in this section responds to an assignment that asked students to imagine a conversation between Sun Tzu, Niccolo Machiavelli, and Lord Acton, three authors studied during Term II. In “Strict, Clever, Moral, or Nurturing: A Drama on Parenting,” Rebecca Miller ’14 imagines a post-apocalyptic scenario set at Elmira College that incorporates not only the assigned authors but also Mark Twain and his daughter Susy. In her paper, Becca demonstrates mastery of both analytical and creative techniques as she weaves into her drama quotes from the authors studied in class.

61

The second paper, Annie Goodenough ’14’s “Chocolate Milk: Budding Scholars Discuss Power,” responds to an assignment to imagine a conversation be-tween Desiderius Erasmus, Thomas More, and Winston Churchill. Annie demon-strates in her paper a firm grasp of the authors’ ideas as she envisions the type of people they may have been and what they may have said as children. Her choosing to set the play in a school lunch room makes the paper especially fun to read, but it also illustrates the fact that issues of power exist everywhere.

Strict, Clever, Moral, or Nurturing: A Drama on Parenting by Rebecca Miller ’14

Loud dramatic music plays ominously while a black screen is up. The intro credits begin to roll, fading in and out, concluded by the title. The black screen fades into a scene that can only be described as post-apocalyptic. We are zoomed out to an aerial image of the Southern Tier of New York. Then we slowly zoom in to the campus of Elmira College. The camera pans across the campus until it stops at Carnegie Lawn. The music slowly fades out until only a whistle of the wind is heard. Zoom in on the center of the lawn, where there is the faint cry of a young child. She appears to be about two years old. Her clothes are torn and singed. She is covered in mud, yet she appears uninjured. As the camera zooms closer, the child grows louder. From different corners of the campus’ ruins, Machiavelli, Sun Tzu, and Lord Acton crawl out and approach the child. All of the men are pale and covered in soot. Their clothes are tattered. Machiavelli has an open wound on his forehead, Sun Tzu is holding his arm gingerly, and Lord Acton appears to have a limp. None of them pick up the child. They merely stand over her and stare at each other, occasionally looking down at the crying child. Suddenly the voice of a narrator sounds from overhead. The male narrator with a deep voice and British accent begins.Narrator: The men who surround this child were once victorious heroes of war.

Now they have been reduced to humbled shells of men. After they all died, these three men met. They were all proud of their concepts of leadership and power, so they decided to bring their methods back to Earth to settle the score once and for all. Machiavelli and Sun Tzu engaged in a nuclear war. Lord Acton attempted to get in the middle of their battle. (As the nar-rator calls out each man’s name, the camera zooms in on him. When the camera zooms in completely, each man looks up and stares directly into the lens.)

Narrator: None survived except for themselves. Or so they thought.The men continue to stare at the child, all refusing to speak. The wind continues to whistle eerily in the background, while the child’s screams are getting louder and more desperate.Child: Poppa!! Pa? Pa.The child is reduced to hopelessness. She collapses on the ground and becomes silent. Her eyes grow dark and lifeless. She looks around at the men above her. Lord Acton finally picks her up. At first she shows restraint, but then she snuggles close to Lord Acton and falls asleep.Lord Acton: We must do something. We simply cannot stay around here. The risk

of radiation poisoning is far too great.

62

Sun Tzu: Where do you propose we should go? Furthermore, how do you propose we get there?

Lord Acton’s face appears sheepish and desperate for answers. Machiavelli: The Lord is right. We must go. Let us seek refuge in the campus li-

brary. It is the only building that did not suffer any damage in the nuclear explosions. Perhaps it is a protective fortress of some kind.

The men slowly walk across campus. The camera zooms out and follows them from above and behind. As they proceed, a mess of purple and gold ruins is seen strewn across the land. Also, an uncanny number of remains of irises lay scattered among the ruins. Most are singed almost beyond recognition. The men arrive at the Gannett-Tripp Library. Among the eerie smoke and ruins, the library remains mysteriously tall and lit. Curiously, the automatic doors are still functioning. None of the power seems to have been shut off in this library. When they walk in, they see a bench with a copper Mark Twain statue seated. Something appears uncanny about the statue, but the men continue past it. They proceed to the purple couches in the back corner. Lord Acton puts the small girl down on the couch next to him. She is still sleeping.Sun Tzu: We must discuss a plan to take care of this girl. “Regard your soldiers

as your children, and they will follow you wherever you may lead. Look on them as your own beloved sons, and they will stand by you even unto death” (80). I’m sure this could work for girls too. Treat your daughter like your soldiers.

Machiavelli: No, no, no! You have this all wrong, Sun Tzu. You cannot treat a child like a soldier. You must be a parent in the same way a prince rules a princedom.

Lord Acton: I agree! A parent is like a leader.Machiavelli: Thank you. We must keep in mind “that we should wish to be both

[feared and loved]; but since love and fear can hardly exist together, if we must choose between them, it is far safer to be feared than loved” (43). On the same token, we cannot be hated.

Lord Acton: That is poppycock! A child should admire her parents. “The inflex-ible integrity of the moral code is, to me, the secret of the authority, the dignity, the utility of History” (Acton).

Sun Tzu: Yes, that’s the ticket! “The Moral Law causes the people to be in complete accord with their ruler, so that they will follow him regardless of their lives, undismayed by any danger” (40). A child must never question her parents. She must not disagree with them, regardless of what her opinion is on a matter. After all, parents know best.

Machiavelli: No, a father need not remain moral. He is outside of morals. He is the father. He must assert his power and authority by whatever means necessary.

Lord Acton: No, that is not so! “Power tends to corrupt, and absolute power cor-rupts absolutely” (Acton). You shall harm that child if you exert absolute power over her!

Machiavelli: No, sir, if a child senses weakness in authority, she will undermine her parents’ power consistently. She will try every method possible to insure she gets her way.

63

Sun Tzu: Not if we trick her into compliance. We may make her believe she has the power. Allow her to choose her own actions, but in reality we shall be manipulating her actions.

Machiavelli: That is all very well and good, but how do you propose we do that?Sun Tzu: Through deception.Sun Tzu grins widely and chuckles a bit to himself. Machiavelli ponders the concept, while Lord Acton grows angrier and angrier. The child remains peacefully sleeping on the couch, completely unaware of the discussion of her care.Lord Acton: You, my friend, are a hypocrite! You agreed with me earlier about

upholding strict morals, and yet you call for deception! The moral thing to do is be honest. Uphold a high standard of honesty! Hold your child to high moral expectations. A moral individual does not undermine power, does not seek to attack where he senses weakness, and does not misbe-have! A moral individual lives a life of integrity and dignity. Children will follow the example of their parents! We must always, always be aware of our actions! The moment we do wrong, the moment we fall from good-ness, is the moment we destroy the very delicate relationship between our children and us!

After this loud outburst, the little girl stirs in her sleep. The three men appear to panic, but the girl stretches and rolls over. She settles back into her deep slumber, while a collective sigh of relief is heard from all three men.Machiavelli: (snidely) Is getting angry moral, my Lord? Sun Tzu: Gentlemen, let us remain civil. The child must not sense any division

amongst us.Machiavelli: We all possess many different qualities, “one is accounted liberal [points

to self], another miserly [points to Sun Tzu] … one is generous [points to self], another greedy [points to Lord Acton]; one cruel [points to self], another ten-derhearted [points to Lord Acton]; one is faithless [points to Sun Tzu], another true to his word [points to self]; one effeminate and cowardly [points to Lord Acton], another high-spirited and courageous [points to Sun Tzu]; one is courteous [points to self], another haughty [points to Sun Tzu]; one impure [points to self], another chaste [points to Lord Acton]; one simple [points to self], another crafty [points to Sun Tzu], one firm [points to self], another facile [points to Lord Acton]; one grave [points to self], another frivolous [points to Lord Acton]; one devout [points to self], another unbelieving [points to Sun Tzu]” (40). We will of course be divided amongst us. We will constantly be fighting over the correct way to raise the child. That is why I will assume complete power over the child.

Lord Acton: That is simply impossible. Like I said earlier, “absolute power corrupts absolutely” (Acton). That is why a child has a mother and a father. In this case, the child will have to have at least two fathers. If you are not satisfied with sharing parenting responsibilities, Sun Tzu and I will raise the child together.

Quick camera shot back to the bench where the Mark Twain statue was, and the statue is gone. Camera returns to the three gentlemen and the small child.

64

Sun Tzu: I am not opposed to this idea. I believe we should avoid fighting with the child at all costs. I am willing to try being a moral example for her. I can-not guarantee I will not be deceptive, though. It is in my nature. However, I believe you will forgive me because you are so moral. I also think that my deception will serve us well in the teenage years. Adolescent girls are prone to fighting with their parents. We can avoid many fights through my deceptive techniques. I am not usually confrontational, but, Machiavelli, your strict power-holding techniques would drive the child away from us. Lord Acton, if you agree to compromising and working with me, I would be more than happy to parent this child with you.

Lord Acton is looking around the room. He has a terrified expression on his face, and he does not respond to Sun Tzu. Machiavelli has an expression of both anger and confusion.Sun Tzu: Lord Acton? Lord Acton: Yes? Oh, sorry. I was a bit distracted. There is something not right

about this place. I suppose it is just uncannily silent because no one is around except us. I am glad you agree with my proposal to raise her to-gether, Tzu. Machiavelli, if you wish to be involved in her life, you may act as a sort of pseudo-uncle to her.

Machiavelli: (sarcastically) How generous. (seriously) I have another idea. With a newly acquired child, we have three options, “the first is to destroy it; the second, to go and reside [with it]; the third, to suffer it to live on under its own laws” (11). We simply cannot send a child to live and survive on its own, and since we cannot all live with the child, we may destroy it.

Both Sun Tzu and Lord Acton react in a horrified manner. Both let out small screams of shock.Lord Acton: (screams) “The greatest crime is Homicide. The accomplice is no better

than the assassin; the theorist is worse!” (Acton).Machiavelli chuckles to himself. The child wakes up and begins crying. Sun Tzu picks her up and begins to pat her head awkwardly. Her crying continues.Machiavelli: Do you honestly believe I would kill a child?Lord Acton: Believe? Ha! I already witnessed you kill plenty of children in your

little nuclear war experiment. In fact, Sun Tzu, you killed many children as well! I now realize that I am the only one qualified to care for this child!

Sun Tzu looks around the room eerily. He does not respond immediately. The child continues to cry.Sun Tzu: I feel like we are being watched.Lord Acton: Did you hear what I just said? Please give me the child so we may go

on with our lives!Mark Twain: (approaching from behind) I just heard what you said, and I believe

you are wrong, Lord Acton. I am the only one here qualified to raise this child.

The child’s sobs subside. She wipes her eyes and runs over to Mark Twain. He embraces her and picks her up.Child: Papa!

65

Mark Twain: First of all, I am her father. This is my daughter, Susy. Secondly, none of you are even remotely qualified to be parents.

Lord Acton looks offended, Sun Tzu appears cheerless, and Machiavelli smirks.Mark Twain: You (he indicates Machiavelli) do not have the child’s best interests in

mind. You wish to serve your own power-hungry soul by exerting as much power over her as you possibly can. On top of that, in your own sick and twisted sense of humor, you threatened to kill her. I know dark comedy, and that was not funny. You (he indicates Sun Tzu) might have had a shot if you were consistent in your philosophy. However, children, especially this child, are far too intelligent. They would pick up your inconsistencies and lose much respect for you. And you (he indicates Lord Acton) are too obsessed with being moral. You make it seem as if a child is not permitted to make mistakes. Your high standards for a child would be completely oppressive. Leading by example goes a long way, but morals must also be learned through a child’s own experience. However, the most important reason is that none of you are nurturing. A parent must be full of love for his child. He must encourage her to be herself, to try her best, and to be her very best. A parent must foster creativity and learning through experience. He must be able to accept a child when she misbehaves and when she falls from grace; because children do these things, and you must be prepared to love them no matter what. Discipline is situational. Disci-pline is never planned. A parent must be an example. There are no perfect parents, just like there are no perfect people. Children must learn that perfection is unachievable because of their parents. You men are all better off sticking with what you do. Stay away from children because they would turn out just as delusional as all of you.

Mark Twain puts Susy down and holds her hand. The two of them turn and walk out of the library. Susy looks back at the three men and waves. The father and daughter walk through the library doors and out into the mysterious fog until they disappear. The three men look at each other dumbfounded. Lord Acton’s mouth is ajar, Sun Tzu is blinking uncontrollably, and Machiavelli is shaking his head. Machiavelli recovers first.Machiavelli: Well, then, tell us how you really feel. All’s well that ends well. It seems

that our little experiment was a success. My curiosity is satisfied. We may have caused plenty of damage, but you know what they say, the ends justify the means. Oh, wait, they say that to summarize my philosophies.

He chuckles to himself and then stands up and proceeds to exit the library. As soon as he reaches the door, he looks back and gives an arrogant smirk. He then walks off in a different direction than Mark Twain and Susy and disappears in the fog.Lord Acton: The nerve of that Mark Twain. He sets such a terrible example for his

daughter. Honestly, it just isn’t right that some people are permitted to procreate.

Acton stands up and begins walking towards the exit. He gets about halfway there and turns around to face Sun Tzu, who still has not recovered from the shock of Mark Twain’s words.Lord Acton: Are you coming?Sun Tzu looks startled. He then stands up and follows Lord Acton to the door.

66

Sun Tzu: (murmurs to himself) Rest easy, Susy. At the exit, Sun Tzu turns off the lights in the library and then leaves the building. Lord Acton follows in the direction of Machiavelli. Sun Tzu follows in the direction of Mark Twain and Susy. All slowly disappear into the fog. Only the whistle of the wind is audible as the screen fades to black. Suddenly, “Sergeant Pepper’s Lonely Hearts Club” by The Beatles begins to play as the credits roll.

Works CitedActon, Lord. “Acton on Moral Judgments in History.” The Forum at The Online

Library of Liberty. Liberty Fund, 2011. Web. 10 Feb. 2011.Machiavelli, Niccolo. The Prince. Trans. N.H. Thompson. Mineola, NY: Dover,

1992. Print.Tzu, Sun. The Art of War. Minneapolis: Filiquarian Publishing, 2006. Print.

Chocolate Milk: Budding Scholars Discuss Power by Annie Goodenough ’14

Students file into the lunch room at Charlton Heights Elementary School. The fifth grade class hustles to find their tables and start eating before recess. Thomas More and Gerrit Gar-ritszoon (later to be known as Desiderius Erasmus) are best friends who always sit together and discuss what they prefer for lunch and what they think about school. While they are enjoying their daily dose of chocolate milk, a new boy comes over to their spot in the lunch room and asks:Winston: (properly, with an uppity English accent) Might I join you for lunch? I haven’t

anyone to sit with, as I am a new student here. I’d love to share my Gold-fish with you, if you would like. We just moved here from the next town over and I would adore making your acquaintance.

Tom: Sure. Don’t see why not. My name is Thomas More. You can call me Tom. And this is Gerrit (gestures to his friend).

Gerrit: (waving) Hi. Take a seat. (awkward silence)Tom: So . . . What was your old school like?Winston: I really liked it there. I was actually pretty popular, and I was president of

the class. Oh, and we were field day champions! Our class was really ner-vous that we might not win, but I think my motivational cheers pulled us through. We lost some of our races, but at the end of the day we were victorious.

Gerrit: That’s nice. I’m not very competitive; I don’t really like sports or violence. We used to have a class president, but during the election at the begin-ning of the year, one kid changed how the whole system worked.

Winston: Really? Aw, man, that really stinks! I was thinking about running for something next year, but I guess I can’t now. How did that happen?

Gerrit: See that kid over there? (points across lunch room) With the blue hoodie? His name is Acton. He and two other guys, Machiavelli, who skipped a grade,

67

and Sun Tzu, who is in lunch detention, all ran for president at the beginning of the year. Apparently Machiavelli got into trouble because he was bribing us and Sun Tzu was bullying Machiavelli, so that stirred up all kinds of issues. At the end of the day, nobody wanted to vote for anyone. So Acton stepped in at the last minute and won us over by saying that if he were elected, he would omit the title of “president” and make student government representative instead of dictated.

Winston: That’s kind of cool, but I still think that someone big should be in charge. That way more can get done. The class needs someone to look to in times of need, like during field day!

Gerrit: Yes, I suppose so. I like to stay impartial to these sorts of things. I’m not about to run around trying to fight Acton for starting this. I’m content with this new representative system.

Tom: I agree. Hey, Winston! Do you like Pokemon?Winston: I have a small collection, yes. Tom: Cool! We should play during recess. I really don’t want to play soccer today.

I’d much rather have discussions or trade Pokemon cards. After school, we should play with Harold.

Winston: Great! I’d love to meet some more people.Gerrit: I just love Harold! He is such an adorable creature!Winston: What?Tom: Harold is a hedgehog!Winston: Oh! Ha ha! I have two dogs named Rufus and Reginald. They are English

bulldogs!Gerrit: We don’t really like dogs.Tom: I’m allergic to most typical pets. That’s why I have a hedgehog. (Tom notices Martin Luther coming with his lunch tray)Tom: Oh no, look who’s coming! Quick! Pretend that we aren’t here. Maybe he

won’t see us (takes a breath of his inhaler).Winston: What’s the matter? Who are you talking about?Martin: (abruptly) Well, well! Who do we have here? Are you a new student? Come

now, Gerrit, introduce us already! Don’t be a coward! Who’s your new friend?

Gerrit: Umm . . . um . . .Martin: Having trouble there, Gerrit? Tom: His name is Winston, Winston Churchill. He just moved here. Winston this

is--Martin: (obnoxiously) Martin! Martin Luther at your service! How nice it is to meet

our new classmate. Hi there! (they shake hands)Winston: You, too. Martin: Well then! I’ll just see you fellows on the playground (knocks over Gerrit’s

milk and walks away).Gerrit: Oh no! My new sweater vest! (sighs) Let’s clean this up. Winston: (dabbing the table with paper towels) What’s his problem? Why does he pick

on you guys? He is way geekier than you are.

68

(pause)Winston: Sorry, I didn’t mean it that way. It’s just, he seems like he’s really out to

get you for some reason. Gerrit: He never used to be this way. You see, Marty and us used to get along re-

ally well. He was always really impressed with my thoughts and my good grades. I really like to write stories and stuff, and he always really liked my ideas. But ever since the beginning of the year, he has gotten really rebel-lious. He is always talking about how we should stop the principal and change the way the school works. Sometimes I agree with him, but, at the same time, I don’t want to go against my school. I really like it here; it’s not my place to go around and change things at the drop of a hat.

Winston: I guess that makes sense. But what made him change?Gerrit: Well, one weekend, I went over to play at Tom’s house for a sleepover and

he wasn’t invited. We were goofing around and making fun of the school. I even wrote a funny story about the principal and the workers at school because sometimes it’s just fun to laugh at! I didn’t want anyone to see it. I was just writing it to be funny, and I had no intentions of spreading it around. But then Marty found it in my book bag and thought it was hilarious, so he showed everyone! He was so impressed, and since he was really into changing the school and going against the principal, he asked me to join him. I was flattered, but I didn’t want to get involved. I wanted to stay neutral and keep to myself.

Tom: That made Martin really mad. He said that Gerrit could have made some-thing of himself, but, since he was too afraid, he would never amount to anything. That’s why he is always calling him a coward and bullying us. He wanted Gerrit as ammo to take down the school, not as a friend. And since Gerrit was against it, Martin resents us.

Winston: Well, then. (long pause) I like to write too! I’m not a very good student, but I like history.

Gerrit: Cool (feeling uncomfortable about their new friend).Winston: Yup. Hey. It’s been great talking to you guys, but I think I might try to

meet some people playing soccer on the playground today, if that’s ok. You guys seem really smart and nice, though. Thank you for letting me sit here and for telling me about the school. I’ll talk to that Martin guy for you too, if you want. I’ll tell him to mind his own business.

Gerrit: Thank you. I hope he listens.Winston: See you later, fellas! Churchill goes off to the soccer field and makes a bunch of new friends. He is really athletic and yet still nice to those who do well academically. Gerrit goes through a phase when he asks to be called Desiderius Erasmus, and Thomas More is always his greatest companion.

Works ConsultedChurchill, Winston S. Never Give In!: The Best of Winston Churchill’s Speeches. New

York: Hyperion, 2003. Print.

69

Erasmus, Desiderius. In Praise of Folly. Trans. John Wilson. Mineola, NY: Dover, 2003. Print.

More, Thomas. Utopia. Ed. Ronald Herder. Mineola, NY: Dover, 1997. Print.

Ten-Page Arguments

During Term II, students write a ten-page argumentative paper to hone the argument and research skills they applied in their twenty-page papers in Term I and to prepare them to conquer any writing assignment they may face in other courses. Some students choose to write on course texts, while others choose to write on a topic related more loosely to course reading. The four papers included here represent that diversity, demonstrating how the ideas and texts discussed in Term II serve as inspiration for interesting and in-depth writing.

In “She’s on the Ball: I Love Lucy and the 1950s American Family Sitcom,” Emily Oshinskie ’14 extends beyond course reading and examines the tradition of humor in American media and how it can be used as a vehicle to break stereotypes. Such traditions are of course fundamental to much of Mark Twain’s work. In “Pi-rate Rulers: Machiavellian Strategy and the Colonization of Tortuga,” Rachel Mas-selle ’14 builds on course texts as she argues that buccaneers successfully employed Machiavellian strategies to control the Caribbean. Skylar Clapperton ’14 also builds on course texts in “Not-So-Perfect: Examining Literary Utopias.” In this paper, Sky-lar uses Thomas More’s Utopia as a foundation to discuss later literary examples that also argue that the perfect society can never exist. Finally, in “Abigail Adams: Life, Legacy, and Lasting Impact,” Margaret Feldman ’14 presents a close reading of a historical figure to reveal the impact she had on her husband’s presidency and on women’s rights, a fitting topic for a paper written at a college founded on the tradition of equality for women.

She’s on the Ball: I Love Lucy and the 1950s American Family Sitcomby Emily Oshinskie ’14

The fiery redheaded Lucille Ball and her suave Cuban husband had no idea of the journey ahead of them when they started performing vaudevilles in 1950. Beginning in 1951, they would take part in creating a television show that would become one of the most groundbreaking comedies of the era. Over the six-year run of I Love Lucy, as they established their claim to fame as the Cuban and Caucasian couple on American television, they experienced both rejection and praise. Ultimately, though, they overcame the barriers to produce one of the most successful programs of all time. The show was popular throughout the country, and, by its second season, “when the official ratings came in I Love Lucy was indeed the top television show in America, with some 23 million people tuning in every week” (Kanfer 149). I Love Lucy left a lasting impression on American television not only in the 1950s but also to this day. Through the innovations and changes in its

70

format and subject matter, it was one of the shows that revolutionized American family sitcoms.

Lucille Ball and her husband, Desi Arnaz, were a pioneer couple for the television sitcom of the 1950s. After Ball’s radio show, My Favorite Husband, she was itching for a new act, and CBS was eager to give Ball a shot at a comedy show (Wilk 250). Suddenly, there was talk of Desi Arnaz joining Ball on a sitcom, which caused controversy due to his Cuban ethnicity. The CBS producers vaguely commented that a sitcom was supposed to be an “American domestic comedy” (Wilk 251). The status quo for the 1950s family sitcom was an all-white, happy, and prosperous American family who laughed together, ate together, and avoided conflict. Lucille Ball commented on the nature of the other prime time television sitcoms of the time: “It was all stuff about Hollywood couples, and so far as I could see, a Holly-wood couple has no problems in the eyes of the audience. If they have a big house, a car, a swimming pool, and live in California, tell me— what’s their problem?” (qtd. in Wilk 250). From the beginning, Ball and Arnaz’s image was not the most desired depiction of marriage and the all-American family, but their hard work eventually helped them break past these societal expectations and produce a comedy that de-fied all previous definitions of an American family.

But this acceptance by the mainstream television audience would take time. Following their first off-putting encounter with CBS, Ball and Arnaz decided to redirect their talent toward a more encouraging audience. To showcase their skill, “the couple took their proposed show out to play vaudeville dates, perform-ing the domestic comedy sketches and interspersing the material with song and dance” (Wilk 251). Their popularity soared, as their audience loved watching them perform. This acceptance then enabled them to actualize the possibilities of filming a television show. When Ball and Arnaz were granted the opportunity of producing their show on kinescope (a process common at the time, in which the show is shot live in one time zone and preserved on kinescope to be shown later in other time zones) and in New York, Lucille refused this proposal and demanded that the show would be filmed (Wilk 251). Filming at the time was new and expensive, but it pro-vided better quality, so Ball negotiated with Arnaz and persuaded him to invest his interest in the resourcefulness of film, commenting, “Look— we’ll do it for a year or so, and if it bombs, then at least we’ll have something like home movies— to show to our kids” (qtd. in Wilk 251). Initially, Arnaz resisted but eventually he bought into the idea, persuaded by his wife’s bold and brassy opinions.

Reflecting back on the beginning of their production of I Love Lucy, Ball commented, “So we borrowed $5,000 . . . and became owners of our own idea” (qtd. in Wilk 251). Even though this was uncharted territory to these young televi-sion stars, Lucille Ball was determined to see this production bloom. Towards the end of the production of I Love Lucy, Ball reminisced, “When it was finished and shown to CBS, the same executives who had turned it down in its primary stages were quick to recognize their unfortunate error and, being nothing if not resource-ful, arranged for it to appear on their network” (qtd. in Wilk 252). Through Ball’s persistent determination and willingness to experiment with the unknown, she

71

fought for the best interest of the show and maneuvered successfully through the unfamiliar territory of advocating for her own show.

I Love Lucy was the first family sitcom on television that utilized the resource-fulness and ingenuity of film. Since many other sitcoms of the 1950s “employ[ed] a single camera . . ., scenes with the same backdrop were filmed together, often out of sequence, over a three-day period” (Kanfer 143). However, this single camera in-hibited flexibility, preventing the actors and actresses from going back through the scenes and modifying their dialogue and action. Through the implementation of a three-camera angle on I Love Lucy, the different shots could be edited with greater ease. Therefore, the conglomeration of each scene into the whole sequence was not limited to three days, but extended to an entire week (Kanfer 143). According to Stefan Kanfer, “the delay allowed the writers, and the star herself, to incorporate bits that had occurred to them during the week. Lucy took advantage of the flex-ibility, sometimes at high, if hilarious cost” (143).

A cameraman by the name of Karl Freund was the first to introduce Ball and Arnaz to the concept of a three-camera angle. Ball reflects on Freund’s camera phenomenon and his assistance, commenting, “One night he brought us out to his house in the valley, and showed us a system he’d invented for us, one that could film simultaneously on three cameras . . . . [H]is machine played back all three shots simultaneously, so you could cut from one shot to the other” (qtd. in Wilk 252). Lucille and Desi were instantly amused by this camera, which is one of the factors that contributed to the success of their show and their revolutionary approach to the art of television.

Lucille Ball’s approach to her feisty role as Lucy Ricardo on I Love Lucy revolutionized the depiction of the American woman and gradually changed tele-vision’s representation of the typical housewife. Prior to I Love Lucy, many family sitcoms depicted the housewife as a submissive and flawless woman who was the “perfect” wife and mother. For example, Leaver It To Beaver’s June Cleaver was a faultless and fit housewife who “personified a Hollywood postwar family ideal of the ever-sweet, ever-helpful suburban stay-at-home mom” (Pollack). However, Lucy strayed from this typical depiction of a housewife, constantly defying the stereotypes and severing the expectations that came with the label of “housewife.” According to Joyce Millman, “Lucy usually did get what she wanted, or at least a taste of it. And even when her schemes backfired, she had the satisfaction of subverting Ricky’s authority, of proving that she could do the impossible. Lucy waged an unspoken battle against Ricky’s attitude of male superiority— you could feel her sense of in-justice burning behind every scheme” (Millman). Since Lucille Ball was a blunt character herself, embodying Lucy Ricardo and all of her ridiculous and chaotic schemes was not too far from her imagination. However, even though Ball was not trying to impersonate anyone other than herself, her reputation as a mother and a housewife was not aligned with the usual perceptions of women in the American nuclear family of the 1950s and 1960s. Throughout her career, Ball continuously transcended the normal expectations and introduced a groundbreaking image of the 1950s housewife.

72

Through Lucille Ball’s success on I Love Lucy, she surfaced as the premiere female comedian on television. Reviews of this pioneering show often mention that her bold and sassy attitude seemed to carry the show. Her stage presence was impeccable, and her comedic timing was unparalleled. As Kanfer comments, “The writers created the situations, and Lucy embodied them. If she schemed to get around Ricky and he discovered the plot, she spoke the lie but expressed the truth in fluent body language” (143). Lucille Ball could make her audience laugh without saying a single word; through her animated facial expressions and mocking body movements and postures, she would have a whole room laughing hysterically. She had reached a new level of comedy in the sense that “no comic situation fazed her or appeared too extreme for her abilities” (Kanfer 143). Ball was the queen of com-edy, the mastermind of hilarity. Through her unprecedented physical comedy, her witty remarks, and her knack for understanding the needs of the audience, Lucille Ball embodied the essence of timing and detail in comedy, something that was completely new for a woman of her time.

As I Love Lucy revolutionized the form and content of television in Amer-ica, Lucille Ball molded and set the criteria for female and male entertainers alike. Even in the early stages of production, “she quickly established herself as the me-dium’s premier physical comedian. This was no small task, given the inspired level of slapstick to be found on early 1950s television, including her longtime MGM friend Red Skeleton, who later became her favorite prime-time rival” (Gehring 68). Ball’s trademark facial expressions and body movements defined her ability to step beyond her beauty (the primary means by which actresses were judged at the time) to make her audience laugh. One of her signature facial expressions originated from “her tendency to drop her jaw in an open-mouthed stance to express her disbelief at what was occurring” (Hanson and Garcia-Myers). Each of her hilarious actions en-abled the American audience to recognize the tendencies of Lucy’s true character.

Ball’s comedy was even acknowledged by the industry because, in the first season of I Love Lucy, she was nominated for an Emmy Award (Kanfer 147). In fact, even Red Skelton, who actually won the Emmy that year, had to admit, “You gave this to the wrong redhead. I don’t deserve this. It should go to Lucille Ball” (qtd. in Kanfer 147). This was high praise indeed, and many awards would follow in later years. Overall, throughout her life, Lucille Ball was praised for her groundbreaking approach towards comedy on television and her knack for certain physical comedy techniques. Today, as a testament to her comic genius, Ball remains one of the shin-ing examples for male and female comedians alike.

Ball’s dominant personality was apparent both in the living rooms of her viewers and on the set with the actors and producers. Every episode viewers won-dered, “What silly, zany, crazy thing will Lucy do today?” America loved Lucy’s defiance of her typical housewife role and her sense of control and poise on stage. While Desi admired Lucille’s strong presence, he also “was deeply hurt by all the publicity that said that the success of the show was entirely due to her artistry” (Kanfer 143). Lucille Ball was the glue that held the show together, but her over-bearing personality often left Desi in the shadows. In fact, Desi himself admitted, “Remove any other actor from the project and it would be diminished. Take away

73

Lucille Ball, and it would be demolished” (qtd. in Kanfer 143). Even the show’s title, I Love Lucy, alluded to her central role and her prevailing importance in the eyes of her audience.

It was this central role, though, that allowed the show to become so em-powering for women. Lucy Ricardo not only controlled the stage but also demand-ed to be treated as an equal to Ricky. Throughout the entire run of I Love Lucy, “she was the one who kept everything going on the show, the one who subverted the limits of ‘normal channels’ and became, for . . . women at least, a symbol of free-dom from both her husband and the larger society” (Press 76-77). During a time of conformity and convention, Lucy Ricardo’s budding feminism and independence was a shock to American society, and it empowered countless women to assert their feelings and convictions.

But Desi was by no means unimportant to the show, and, in a society that was uncomfortable with marriage between people of different ethnicities, Desi’s presence as a main character was perhaps just as groundbreaking as Lucy’s femi-nism. When Ball told CBS that she would act on I Love Lucy only if Arnaz played her husband, “CBS executives and the program’s potential advertisers didn’t buy the idea, feeling that casting a thick-accented Latino as the husband of a typical American wife would not sit well with U.S. viewers” (Hanson and Garcia-Myers). Eventually CBS began to notice that the dynamic duo’s talent and complimentary acting provided the American people with endless laughter, so they supported the show. However, even though CBS eventually was willing to promote television’s first multi-ethnic couple, prejudice still existed. Throughout the production of I Love Lucy, “Desi was painfully aware that CBS regarded him, in the words of one executive, as the Cuban caboose on Lucy’s Twentieth Century train” (Kanfer 142). Desi was constantly trying to improve his skills as a producer and actor while si-multaneously combating the racism of the time. While this prejudice might have deterred Desi from his stardom, he was further motivated and tried to prove to his cast and crew that he was both a good actor and accomplished producer. According to Kanfer, “He worked overtime to show that he was an intelligent, focused player as well as a responsible leader. Thus, on Monday mornings when the cast assembled to look over the new script, Desi made sure to absorb the material as soon as he read it, and he always delivered a solid reading the first time through” (142). Through Desi’s determination and desire to be accepted as a Cuban on American television, he not only achieved fame but he also received respect from his cast and crew as well as from the viewing audience.

While CBS initially did not want to risk showing this multi-ethnic cou-ple’s relationship on prime time television, over time they began to appreciate what they had, which led to greater social acceptance of people from all backgrounds. As production of the show began, “the writers used the characters’ differing ethnic backgrounds to great comedic effect” (Hanson and Garcia-Meyers). The relation-ship and marriage between a Caucasian woman and a Cuban man was a startling idea for the audience of the time, but, after I Love Lucy became a great hit, “America not only came to love Lucy and Ricky, [but also] saw their television marriage as ahead of its time—a belief shared by fans and by the couple’s children. Moreover,

74

many Americans of color gravitated towards Arnaz at a time when television offered them few characters with whom to identify” (Gehring 68-69). Arnaz’s ethnicity in-vited a new audience to partake in the zany yet refreshing marriage between Lucy and Ricky Ricardo on screen and Lucille Ball and Desi Arnaz behind the scenes. This new crowd of viewers finally accepted and began to identify with the couple as well as with Ricky himself. For example, in Eddy Murphy’s documentary “‘Eddie Murphy Raw,’ the comedian reminisces on the lack of small-screen heroes during his childhood — except for Ricky Ricardo” (Gehring 69). The marriage of these two comedic geniuses not only allowed for greater tolerance of minorities in the white-dominated sitcoms of the 1950s and 1960s, but it also enabled viewers of different backgrounds to relate to television characters.

Making Lucille Ball’s pregnancy in 1953 a part of the show was another way in which I Love Lucy ignited a new era for American television. As Kanfer says, when Ball announced her pregnancy with her second child, panic struck the set of I Love Lucy as well as its producers (154). The producers did not know how to address Lucy’s “pregnancy” because it was too taboo a subject for broadcasting in the 1950s: “Lucy could be ‘expecting’ or ‘with child,’ but the word ‘pregnant’ could not be uttered in prime time” (Kanfer 155). The solution was that “a priest, a rabbi, and a minister would vet each of the ‘baby show’ scripts, and attend each of the screenings. If a phrase, a sequence, or even a word was found offensive it would be excised” (Kanfer 155-156). Even though taboo subjects were beginning to surface in American entertainment, it seemed that only I Love Lucy could properly execute the right amount of appropriateness by maintaining a balance between comedy and sensitivity. As Jack Gould’s radio and television column from the January 16, 1953 edition of The New York Times read, “Far from ridiculing motherhood, ‘I Love Lucy’ has made it appear one of the most natural and normal things in the world” (qtd. in Davies and Smith 33). Nevertheless, the producers’ decision to present Lucille’s pregnancy on television was a huge moment in television history.

When the much-anticipated day of the baby’s arrival came, the audience was ready: “On January 19, 1953 the arrival of Little Ricky Ricardo attracted an estimated forty-four million viewers to CBS for I Love Lucy, a peak for the already massively popular show and an all-time high Trendex rating of 71.1, far outstripping the 29 million viewers who watched Eisenhower’s inauguration as President the next day” (Davies and Smith 5). American viewers were intrigued with the unprec-edented boldness of I Love Lucy and its ability to successfully produce a show on an unmentionable topic with absolute conviction and comedy.

American television hit an all-time high during the production of I Love Lucy. During the height of its production, “in 1953, 67% of American homes tuned in every Monday night — a figure which probably never again will be approached (for a season), given the multitude of channels” (Gehring 72). The show was revo-lutionary not only in its technique of three-camera filming, but also in its subject matter. It promoted ethnic tolerance and tested the boundaries of the taboo with its comments on feminism as represented by a firey red-headed woman who refused to conform to stereotypes. Through Lucille Ball and Desi Arnaz’s persistent determi-nation, the show revealed to the conventional society of the 1950s the potential of

75

comedy to transform not only the family sitcom, but also our points of view about the world.

Works CitedDavies, Jude and Carol R. Smith. “Race, Gender, and the American Mother: Politi-

cal Speech and the Maternity Episodes of I Love Lucy and Murphy Brown.” American Studies 39.2 (1998): 33-63. Web. 8 Mar. 2011.

Gehring, Wes. “‘I Love Lucy’ Turns 50.” USA Today Magazine 130.2676 (2001): 68-72. Academic Search Complete. Web. 24 Feb. 2011.

Hanson, Steve and Sandra Garcia-Myers. “I Love Lucy.” St. James Encyclopedia of Popular Culture. Eds. Sara Pendergast and Tom Pendergast. Vol. 2. Detroit: St. James Press, 2000. n. pag. Gale Virtual Reference Library. Web. 26 Feb 2011.

Kanfer, Stefan. Ball of Fire: the Tumultuous Life and Comic Art of Lucille Ball. New York: Knopf, 2003. Print.

Millman, Joyce. “Television/Radio: The Good, the Bad, the Lucy: A Legacy of Laughs; Coolly Confident, Timelessly Funny.” New York Times. New York Times, 14 Oct. 2001. Web. 1 Mar. 2011.

Pollack, Michael. “Barbara Billingsley, TV’s June Cleaver, Dies at 94.” New York Times. New York Times, 16 Oct. 2010. Web. 26 Feb. 2011.

Press, Andrea Lee. Women Watching Television: Gender, Class, and Generation in the American Television Experience. Philadelphia: U of Pennsylvania P, 1991. Print.

Wilk, Max. The Golden Age of Television: Notes from the Survivors. New York: Dela-corte, 1976. Print.

Pirate Rulers: Machiavellian Strategy and the Colonization of Tortuga by Rachel Masselle ’14

The Caribbean Islands were highly sought after during the 1600s. Spain, France, and England fought many brutal battles over these lands in hopes of gain-ing the rich trading goods the area offered. In particular, Tortuga was prized for its plentiful cattle. However, the battles that waged because of Tortuga’s value made it hard for the three ruling nations to maintain control of it. In fact, the only group that was able to maintain control of the island was, of all people, the buccaneers. The Spanish, French, and English may have held on to Tortuga if, like the bucca-neers, they had followed the advice given by Niccolo Machiavelli in The Prince.

When the three imperial nations attempted to expand their empires, they did not have sufficient armies to repel invasions. For instance, when the Spanish settled on Tortuga and began trading with other countries, the English and French both tried to take over the island so they could get their hands on the riches. Al-though the Spanish were successful in repelling their first invasion, they were not so lucky the second time. The Spanish fleet left to help defend Hispaniola, which was also being ravaged by French settlers. Without an army to stop them, the French

76

and English took over and divided the island (Newton 166-176). Because the Span-ish did not have a sufficient amount of military personnel to defend another piece of land, they lost Tortuga to their French and English adversaries.

Machiavelli strictly warns against such ill planning in The Prince. Machia-velli states, “I say that in my judgment the prince will be able to take care of himself if he has a sufficient supply of men or of money to put an adequate army in the field, capable of engaging anyone likely to attack him” (51). Here, Machiavelli ex-plains how, without a sound military, a country cannot hold onto an acquired land because the country does not have the support it needs.

The buccaneers’ power over Tortuga reinforces the validity of Machiavel-lian principles. After the French and English gained control of Tortuga, they fought each other constantly. While the battles raged, the buccaneers, who began as Eng-lish crown exiles, snuck into the territory and settled on a piece of the island the French and English settlers were not fighting over. There, they started a cattle trade with the merchant ships en route to the American colonies. After a while, the buc-caneers could afford sloops, building an armada of ships. However, the buccaneers did not fight with the ruling nations to gain control of Tortuga because the ruling nations had decided to abandon the territory (Newton 171, 184).

Once the buccaneers gained control, no one dared claim the territory because of the buccaneer armada and their fierce reputation; here, Machiavelli’s theory is proven valid again. According to Machiavelli, “Anyone who has provided carefully for the fortification of his city . . . will never be attacked except with great reluctance. Men are always opposed to ventures in which they foresee difficulties, and it will not seem easy to attack a prince who has kept his city vigorously strong” (47). The buccaneers’ strong navy warded off potential threats. On the other hand, the weak Spanish occupation made it impossible for them to keep control of the island, falling victim to English and French settlers.

Also, the ruling nations did not, as Machiavelli suggests, develop a strong government to rule Tortuga. The kings of these countries were preoccupied in their homelands and could not be bothered with visiting their colonies. Instead, they sent settlers (sometimes “undesirables”) to live on Tortuga; these people could not create a stable government. By the time the English and French refurbished the Spanish colony, both nations were battling for their lands. Without a leader, Tortuga was in a state of chaos. Machiavelli claims that when a leader decides to take over a foreign territory, “One of the best and most ready solutions is for the ruler to reside there. . . . Being on the spot one may observe disorders as they arise and quell them quickly; not being present, one will learn about them only when they have assumed such proportions that they cannot be quelled” (19). The monarchs failing to live among the settlers of Tortuga allowed problems to arise that could not be solved. For instance, while the settlers refurbished buildings left behind by the Spanish, the monarch could have established political leaders, ensuring a strong government in Tortuga. Also, even though the island was uninhabited when the English and French gained possession, the settlers still had to accommodate criminals the kings exiled to the island. If the monarch had been present in Tortuga, he could have established political control. Then, the society could have grown prosperous.

77

The buccaneer nations, however, thrived because of the governments they established. The first governor of Tortuga was a French buccaneer by the name of Le Vessuer, who was an educated man in both the liberal arts and the military. Un-der his rule, the already flourishing Tortuga reached new heights. When the buc-caneers were having a hard time manning their ships, Le Vesseur ushered in new recruits. He played off man’s desire for adventure and fast money to attract a large crowd of men to the island (Kemp and Lloyd 195-200). Le Vesseur lived among his people and was easily able to address its problems, just as Machiavelli describes.

Le Vessuer also created a written law for the buccaneers (Kemp and Lloyd 195). These laws ranged from how an individual’s ship was to be governed to how much a sailor was compensated if he lost a limb in battle. The laws were strictly en-forced, and punishments varied from crime to crime. The most severe punishment was keelhauling, which was when a man had his legs tied to a rope that loped under the ship and up to one of the masts. Then the rope was pulled and the man was dragged under the hull of the ship. Along the way, the barnacles that had grown on the belly of the ship cut his back and head. Many men did not survive the punish-ment (Woodard 15). Ironically, this sentence was often carried out when a member of the crew took more than his share of the plunder. This was considered stealing another man’s property and was severely frowned upon.

Another mistake the ruling nations made while trying to take over the Caribbean was allowing the buccaneers to have control over the islands. During the war between England and Spain, England used the buccaneers to harass the Span-ish. They allowed them to rob ports like Portobello and Panama in order to wound the Spanish control. “They [the English] used the buccaneers to help keep the Spanish at bay,” says Terry Breverton, author of Admiral Sir Henry Morgan, during his interview in True Caribbean Pirates. “It’s much cheaper than hiring a navy” (qtd. in True Caribbean Pirates). England chose not to put money toward a navy to ensure law and order. As a result, the Caribbean fell into chaos. As Kevin McDonald, a History Professor at UC Santa Cruz says, “The Caribbean was basically a free for all. . . . They would have Spanish being attacked by French, and then English would be attacking the French; the Dutch were also involved. It was basically sort of a frontier zone, where anything goes” (qtd. in True Caribbean Pirates). This did not bode well for the English, who were used to order. To the buccaneers, however, it was paradise and theirs for the taking.

Machiavelli describes how a government should manage its military. In The Prince, he describes how “a prince must have no other objective, no other thought, nor take up any profession but that of war, its methods and its discipline, for that is the only art expected of a ruler” (Machiavelli 59). Instead of learning the art of war for himself and using his own military, the King of England decided to use the “undesirables” to control the Caribbean. This resulted in the Caribbean not being controlled by the English, but by the buccaneers they hired. These individuals may be equated to mercenaries. Machiavelli also warns against this choice: “Now, mercenary and auxiliary forces are useless and dangerous; and any ruler who keeps his state dependent upon mercenaries will never have real peace or security, for they are disorganized, undisciplined, ambitious, and faithless” (31). By allowing the

78

buccaneers to control the military in the Caribbean, the English opened the door for the buccaneers to take over the land. The English governments’ poor judgment forfeited land the nation had gained in the Caribbean, and it set the stage for the biggest revolt in history.

The buccaneers, although sometimes frivolous with their spending, were smart when it came to military matters. Even though the buccaneers would often waste money on alcoholic drinks and pleasurable company while on land, they would spend the remainder of their wealth fitting their ships for pillaging. The buc-caneers chose small sloops, which are small sailboats outfitted with cannons. These ships, unlike the big Man of War ships that the three ruling nations possessed, were extremely maneuverable, which made it easy for the buccaneers to slip in and out of the firing line of another ship. Also, unlike the English, the buccaneers used their own forces to capture their prizes. They pillaged, plundered, and defended their territory with no help from outside forces (True Caribbean Pirates).

When attacking ships, the buccaneers used fear to scare their prey into submission. They often flew a flag of skull and crossbones on their craft. This flag became known as the “Jolly Roger” and it struck fear into many hearts. “When sea-man saw the skull and crossbones, they knew they were in trouble,” says Benerson Little, author of the Sea Rovers Practice. “It meant this is a warning. We’re attacking your ship and if you don’t surrender to us, then death is your fate” (qtd. in True Caribbean Pirates). The buccaneers were willing to put time and money into their navy. Because the buccaneers were militarily savvy, they prospered while the English fell into the despair of the Twelve Year War or the Queen Anne’s War.

In 1713, the Spanish, French, Dutch, and English put an end to the Twelve Year War. With the war over, everyone’s economy flourished, except the buccaneers’. The buccaneers made their money by plundering Spanish ships and taking a portion of the prize for themselves. No longer hired to take Spanish ships, they became very poor. They pleaded to their sovereign to allow them to take Span-ish ships in order to put food on the table, but the King of England refused. As a result, the buccaneers took matters into their own hands. Led by Henry Jennings, a group of buccaneers sailed to a nearby island where the Spanish were hoarding a large sum of money. In the dead of night, the buccaneers attacked the encampment and captured the treasure. In this instant, the buccaneers moved from privateering (plundering ships for England) to full piracy (True Caribbean Pirates). At this time, England lost control of their countrymen in the Caribbean. Because the English Monarch did not listen to his citizens, the country began to grow restless and the buccaneers started the biggest revolt the world had ever seen.

In The Prince, Machiavelli describes how to avoid revolts. He writes, “The prince must worry about hidden conspiracies, against which he will find security by avoiding hatred and contempt and by keeping the people satisfied. It is essential that he do this” (71). The King of England leaving his people in the Caribbean to become poor, hungry, and dissatisfied shows he was a poor ruler by Machiavelli’s standards. If the British government had taken the time to listen to the Caribbean settlers, they could have avoided the mess. Instead, they ignored their people, and the buccaneers led a revolt against their sovereign.

79

During the buccaneers’ reign, they never struggled with revolt. Their dem-ocratic system allowed citizens to have a say in what went on. They elected their leaders by a majority vote, and if the leader did not perform as he should, he was removed from office. Also, while sailing on a ship, the buccaneers would vote on where they sailed and what prizes they captured. The ship’s captain had very little power, except during warfare, when his power was absolute (Kemp and Lloyd). This communication between the ruler and the ruled allowed the buccaneers to live as peacefully as could be expected.

With a revolt against them in full swing, the three ruling nations began to get nervous. Stories of pirates like Blackbeard, Calico Jack, and Sam Bellamy echoed through the streets and taverns in Europe. These stories rattled fear into every citizen who thought of going out to sea. In a desperate attempt to stop piracy, the English sent troops to Tortuga to flush the pirates from their nest. When they arrived at the island, their leader attempted to stop piracy by enforcing laws on the settlers. It was his hope that this new order would make them stop their piracy. However, it had the opposite effect. The pirates continued to plunder, only more severely. Each time the government cracked down on the pirates, the pirates would be forced deeper into piracy to make a living (True Caribbean Pirates).

Machiavelli warns rulers about taking away the rights of newly conquered states: “A city which is used to freedom is more easily controlled by means of its own citizens than by any other” (Machiavelli 28). Although the pirates of Tortuga were technically still under English control when troops invaded the island, they were unaccustomed to military personnel telling them what to do. When the military took away rights they had exercised for years, the pirates rebelled. They preyed on English ships and looted naval bases. Instead of getting the pirates under control, the English made matters worse. With their attempt to control Tortuga a failure, they returned to England crushed.

The English could have successfully conquered the pirates by destroying their town. Machiavelli says, “For in truth there is no sure method of holding cities except by destruction” (28). However, after England’s defeat, they gave up trying to rid the Caribbean of pirates and they allowed the buccaneers to control the islands. By Machiavelli’s standards, the English were unwise rulers compared to the pirates. For example, the pirates did destroy the ports they were taking over. When Henry Morgan and his crew sacked the city of Panama, they burned the place to ashes so the citizens would have no way to survive without English aid. Unlike the English, who could not keep control of just Tortuga, the pirates gained new territories like Nassau and Port Royal. The pirates were able to hold onto much of the Caribbean until the end of the Golden Age of Piracy in 1729 (True Caribbean Pirates).

The Spanish, French, and English were unable to maintain a hold on the island of Tortuga, which may have been avoided if they had studied Machiavelli’s classic, The Prince. In spite of the fact that these nations had been ruling for hun-dreds of years, they failed to control one uninhabited island in the Caribbean. Yet, the buccaneers, who had only just begun their endeavors on the high seas, were able to fortify themselves, establish a government, and take control of two more ports in a few short years. The events on Tortuga illustrate that the biggest nations do not

80

always make the greatest nations. Spain, France, and England were formidable pow-ers, but the buccaneers successfully ruled Tortuga from 1639 until 1729. Reputable nations do not always make the best political choices.

Works CitedKemp, P.K. and Christopher Lloyd. Brethren of the Coast: Buccaneers of the South Seas.

New York: St. Martin’s, 1960. Print. Machiavelli, Niccolo. The Prince. New York: Bantam, 1966. Print. Newton, A.P. The European Nations in the West Indies: 1493-1688. London: R & R

Clark, 1933. Print. True Caribbean Pirates. Dir. Tim Prokrop. History Channel, 2006. DVD. Woodard, Colin. The Republic of Pirates. New York: Harcourt, 2007. Print.

Works ConsultedEsquemeling, John. The Buccaneers of America. New York: Dover, 1967. Print.

Not-So-Perfect: Examining Literary Utopiasby Skylar Clapperton ’14

The idea of a perfect community has always been a controversial topic in literature. This controversy is examined within the society of Thomas More’s Utopia, the harbinger of utopian literature, and it is continued in modern novels such as Lois Lowry’s The Giver and Ray Bradbury’s Farenheit 451. More’s views on religion, personal life, and happiness within a controlled environment set the back-drop for his work’s perfect society, a society which, by the end of the book, we come to realize is not so perfect after all. Lowry and Bradbury also examine utopian-like communities in their modern novels, which, like More’s story, show the negative circumstances of a highly controlled society. Lowry analyzes the “perfect” circum-stances of life within her fictional community through government, family, feelings, and a citizen’s quest for knowledge. Bradbury also explores these arenas, though his dystopian community is ruled by the absence of books and literature. While the means of making the point is different in each story, the authors of all three works claim that utopia is not always as perfect as it seems because its citizens lack the abil-ity to make their own choices and gain their own knowledge.

When we first read Thomas More’s Utopia, the society he describes seems ideal. Everything is regulated, and people seem to have a bit of choice in what they do. The citizens also seem to live by the Golden Rule. For example, as would be expected of a work written in the 16th Century, the society emphasizes religion, but the surprising fact is that More’s ideal society in this book lacks a common religion and its many religious groups are tolerant of each other. More claims that a man “ought to use no other force but that of persuasion, and was neither to mix with it reproaches nor violence” (73). Disagreements about religion are settled through discussion and persuasion rather than war. Many different religious denominations are celebrated in this community, and they support each other because they praise

81

a singular deity. The citizens tolerate each religion because they worship the same “Divine Essence,” which is the basis for their beliefs (More 79).

More’s personal belief in freedom of religion is illustrated through this utopian fantasy. It has been reported that, on his death bed, More asked “people to bear witness with him that he should not suffer death in and for the faith of the Holy Catholic Church” (Halpin 299). Even though the Catholic Church did not tolerate other denominations, More believed in the freedom to worship as one saw fit, as described in Utopia. This was a daring statement at the time, and one that today we typically regard as positive. However, there is a darker side to such sup-posed freedoms, as there is much more to More’s utopian society, which will be discussed later.

In Lowry’s The Giver, the government is the main focus, and this gov-ernment has one major job: to control everything. The government regulates the weather, who enters the community, and children’s development. This control regularizes everything in the culture in hopes of optimizing efficiency. For example, snow makes it difficult for the citizens to farm, so it is eliminated. While this may seem positive on some level, this micro-management isolates the community from other societies; citizens are rarely allowed to enter or exit. Therefore, we begin to question whether this utopia is truly perfect and desirable.

In the novel, Lowry seems to argue that this isolation is negative. One rea-son for Lowry’s opinion may derive from her childhood experiences. When she was ten, her family moved to Japan and lived in a “small American enclave” with little to no interaction with other Japanese communities. As she grew older, she asked her mother why she was not allowed out of their small village and her mother said “that we lived where we did because it was comfortable. It was familiar. It was safe” (“Newberry Acceptance Speech”). But as Lowry began to mature, she recognized that this “safety” and “comfort” only kept her from developing her own experiences and gaining new knowledge. This is the same for Jonas and the other citizens in The Giver. They are so isolated that they fail to gain new experiences and ideas. The utopian community that has no problems also limits the citizens’ growth.

Because the people in the society Lowry describes in the novel are isolated, they develop their own rules and methods for child development. Each year, a child is given something new or an object is taken away from him or her to signify the milestone of that age. For example, at the age of eight, the child’s comfort object is taken away and given to a younger child. At age ten, “females [lose] their braids . . . and males, too, [relinquish] their long childish hair and [take] on the more manly short style which [exposes] the ears” (Lowry 46). This complete control by the gov-ernment does not give the citizens freedom to choose how to express their age or gender; they must do as they are told and perform like everyone else in their age group. The government does this so that people do not have to make mistakes; they know what is expected and what is going to happen. In The Giver, the leaders fear that their “perfect” society will fail if the citizens fail.

In Bradbury’s Fahrenheit 451, the government also eliminates choice and controls what citizens experience, and it does so primarily by censoring the media. Leaders censor their culture by burning books and reducing the quality of informa-

82

tion provided to the masses. The fire chief explains this to the protagonist, Guy Montag, saying that the world has become so populated that “films and radios, mag-azines, books [have to be] leveled down to a sort of past pudding norm” (Bradbury 54). So, the content must be of the lowest intellectual value to be understood by the masses; this, in turn, makes it void of true knowledge or thought. The government does not want its citizens to be unhappy, so it eliminates free-thinking, which, in the government’s view, leads to disagreement and unhappiness. Bradbury creates a world where information comes in the form of movies, comics, and billboards, not from books, documentaries, or anything the government assumes is of intellectual value. The government does not want people to think, reason, or argue. They even outlaw rocking chairs and front porches because they promote talking and thinking (Bradbury 63).

Overall, in both The Giver and Fahrenheit 451, the governments have com-plete authority over their citizens’ lives. While such control creates the communities desired, it inhibits individuality. A similar situation exists in More’s Utopia, where citizens do have some choice and are allowed some education, but it is made clear which choices they are to make and what is to be learned. Discussion is encouraged, but primarily with the goal of convincing those who do not agree with the majority (the government) that they should change their thinking. This, of course, means that, ultimately, the citizens of all three of these utopias truly do not have the free-dom to make their own choices.

In The Giver, the government also controls the citizens’ family and per-sonal lives. For example, individuals apply for spouses and children. A committee decides who is ready for a spouse and whom that person will marry. The culture claims that “the essential capacity to connect to others” must be present in a person in order for him or her to receive a “family unit” (Lowry 8). Each family unit is al-lowed to have two children, one boy and one girl. The committee also determines how the children style their hair and what clothes they wear— a simple smock. While this seems as if it would promote equality, this lack of freedom ultimately creates dystopian consequences, as “family units” lose the love and unity that family is supposed to represent and individuals lose their individuality.

The utopian community that Thomas More develops also lacks choice and has rules that outline the culture’s demographics. He writes, “No country fam-ily has fewer than forty men and women in it, besides two slaves. There is a master and a mistress set over every family and over thirty families there is a magistrate” (More 29). Like Lowry’s community, More’s regulates family structures. The people of these states do not have control over their lives and must live up to the rules and expectations of the not-so-perfect government. These expectations, although they seem to create the “perfect” society free of problems, again, result in a dystopia.

Because of the lack of free agency, these communities often lack true emo-tions. For example, the community in The Giver clearly lacks feelings like happiness, sadness, or love. One of the community’s rituals is a special time set aside at dinner when family members discuss the feelings they encountered that day. Ironically, these are not real feelings, but grievances. Lily, the daughter in the story, describes how angry she felt when a visiting student broke the play area rules because he was

83

not familiar with them. This basically is a complaint that someone did not follow the rules. However, when Jonas has a memory of a true feeling, love, he recognizes that the feelings the family shares, like the one Lily shares, are not feelings at all. He says, “I liked the feeling of love . . . I wish we still had that . . . Of course . . . I do understand that it would not work very well. And that it is much better to be organized the way we are now. I can see that it was a dangerous way to live” (Lowry 126). The people in The Giver never know love. Jonas comments on this at dinner and his mother responds, “you used a very generalized word, so meaningless that it has become obsolete” (Lowry 127). Because there are no feelings, community members are saved from sadness and abandonment. However, they are also robbed of the love and true happiness that makes life worthwhile.

The goal of the communities in all three works is, ironically, happiness. In The Giver, as mentioned, emotions are banned because they lead to unhappiness. Likewise, in Fahrenheit 451, the reason the government outlaws books is to prevent unhappiness; books cause contemplation, which decreases happiness. The people also have every new technological advancement to fill their lives with joy. Similarly, in Utopia, More’s communities make happiness the goal of life, and everyone works to find it for themselves and others. More writes, “it is madness to . . . reject the . . . delights of life; unless by renouncing his satisfaction, [a person] can either serve the public or promote the happiness of others” (54). The people of these communi-ties care only about happiness. Unfortunately, while they feel contentment, they also experience intense dissatisfaction and, ironically, they never experience true happiness.

In another effort to maintain happiness, the community in More’s Utopia uses euthanasia as a means to end suffering. This community argues that those who are being euthanized “lose none of the pleasures, but only the troubles of life” (More 58). However, revealing that there is always another side to matters in a utopia, the citizens also use euthanasia to punish negative attitudes that do not contribute to happiness. In the Utopians’ view, negative people are burdens, so they must be removed and replaced by another person who will work for the value of the state. This clearly goes beyond the goal of using euthanasia to end suffering for the terminally ill.

Euthanasia is also present in The Giver. Death comes in the form of “re-lease,” where newborn babies, grandparents, and criminals are killed. As in Utopia, a contributing citizen’s release reflects shame, while the release of an elderly member is met with celebration. The intentional death of a newborn is met with “a sense of what-could-[they]-have-done” (Lowry 7). The protagonist, Jonas, is one of few char-acters in the novel aware of the euthanasia of children. When watching the release of an innocent baby boy, who happens to be only six ounces smaller than his twin brother, he recognizes that release is murder. Jonas watches his father, a Nurturer, inject the poison into the baby’s skull and hopes his father will clean the baby and wrap him up in a blanket to be taken elsewhere. Instead, his father opens a door that resembles “the same sort of chute into which trash [is] deposited at school. His father [loads] the carton containing the body into the chute and [gives] it a shove. ‘Bye-bye, little guy,’ Jonas [hears] his father say before he [leaves] the room” (Lowry

84

150). To keep the society “ideal,” the government asks that a baby be killed simply because he looks like another person. This common presence of euthanasia within Utopia and The Giver shows little regard for human life, which clearly violates even the most basic ideas of what most would consider an ideal world.

Through his quest for knowledge in The Giver, Jonas begins to recognize that the world he lives in is not perfect at all. Because he is assigned as the new Receiver (the person who stores the memories of what occurred before the current society was implemented), he must have memories of the past transmitted into his mind, and this new knowledge disrupts everything he believes is good and fair in this community. He originally sees the sameness of the society as something that is necessary so that everyone can be content, but he soon realizes that the likeness shared between his family, neighbors, and himself has negative consequences. Jonas says, “If everything is the same, then there are not any choices! I want to wake up in the morning and decide things! A blue tunic or a red one” (Lowry 97). His quest for truth opens him to new ideas, and he discovers there is a way out of the madness. One scholar writes, “When you are the one caged, no one notices, your whole self is like a puddle of tears . . . [but] the cage is not forever” (Mahar 110). Jonas does not see anything wrong with the lifestyle of his community until he is aware of how other societies function and of how things were before, and this new awareness compels him to leave “the cage” so he can live a fulfilling life outside of his native utopia, indicating that this perfect society is less than perfect.

Just as Jonas recognizes the truth about his society, so does Guy Montag in Fahrenheit 451. Traveling to work one night, he meets an intellectual young girl who questions everything in life. In a simple five minute conversation, Montag is ques-tioning his entire lifestyle of burning books, being with his materialistic wife, and living a fast-paced life. Within his utopia, the only feeling that matters is happiness, and the only way to achieve that desired happiness is through fast cars and large screen televisions. Once he realizes that books cause people to think, understand, and create solutions, he wants an intellectual lifestyle. However, intellect can only be attained through the outlawed act of reading a book. He comes to grips with the idea that “books are hated and feared [because] they show the pores in the face of life” (Bradbury 83). Montag is no longer content living a meaningless, consumerist-driven lifestyle, and the result of his search for knowledge is like Jonas’; both aban-don their homes in search of better lives.

The alleged utopias of More, Lowry, and Bradbury’s imaginations illus-trate that perfect societies are not achievable. One may be able to create an ordered society, but its citizens lack the ability to think or learn on their own. As these works demonstrate, complete conformity of this type creates a negative environment rath-er than the happiness we all so desire. Ultimately, it is our individuality (which is expressed by our abilities to think, to act, and to experience both the positive and negative) that makes us human. These authors show that what may be called a “per-fect” community is a masking of negative experiences by a controlling government. While each book reveals some positive qualities, the communities in utopian novels present cultures of control and isolation, which ultimately makes them flawed.

85

Works CitedBradbury, Ray. Fahrenheit 451. New York: Balantine, 1991. Print. Halpin, David. “Utopianism and Education: The Legacy of Thomas More.” Britsh

Journal of Educational Studies 49.3 (2001): 299-315. JSTOR. Web. 6 Feb. 2011.

Lowry, Lois. The Giver. New York: Bantam, 1993. Print. ---. “Newberry Acceptance Speech.” June 1994. LoisLowry.com. Lois Lowry, 2011.

Web. 6 Feb. 2011. Mahar, Donna. “Social Justice and the Class Community: Opening the Door to

Possibilities.” The English Journal 90.5 (2001): 107-115. JSTOR. Web. 31 Jan. 2011.

More, Thomas. Utopia. Ed. Ronald Herder. Mineola, NY: Dover, 1997. Print.

Works ConsultedHamblen, Charles F. “Bradbury’s ‘Fahrenheit 451’ in the Classroom.” The English

Journal 57.6 (1968): 818-819+824. JSTOR. Web. 31 Jan. 2011.

Abigail Adams: Life, Legacy, and Lasting Impactby Margaret Feldman ’14

Great U.S. presidents such as George Washington, John Adams, Thomas Jefferson, Abraham Lincoln, and John Kennedy have made significant impacts on national and world history. However, an influence and force far greater than Ameri-can sentiment shaped their presidencies and their lives— their wives. The role of the First Lady is far greater than one may presume. The First Lady plays a pivotal role not only for her ability to influence the President, but also because of the plat-form issues she supports and promotes during her husband’s time in office. Abigail Adams, First Lady and wife of John Adams, highlights the difference one woman can make as wife to the President. With a spitfire personality and an opinionated mindset, Abigail was destined to make her mark in American politics through her strategic position as First Lady.

Abigail Adams grew up as the daughter of a minister near Boston in Wey-mouth, Massachusetts. She and her two sisters, Elizabeth and Mary, were very well educated thanks to their father. The girls were very intellectual. As Cokie Roberts says, “the three women read everything they could get their hands on and had opin-ions on all the events of the area” (6). Abigail’s father played a major role in her re-ligious life as well, as “Abigail ‘wholeheartedly embraced’ her father’s ‘intense faith’ . . . the only sure comfort to the afflicted when she became a full-fledged member of his church in 1759” (Barker-Benfield 32). Abigail’s mother, Elizabeth Smith, also played a critical role in her children’s lives; she showed motherly concern for her children’s health and played the part of mother and of preacher’s wife quite well. Abigail adored her mother for her kindness but always questioned her submissive demeanor.

86

It was their upbringing that taught Abigail and her sisters how to be “household managers and workers” (Akers 4). The girls worked on their father’s farm and acquired the skills, tools, and experience to be successful. Learning a tire-less work ethic, Abigail was always ready to roll up her sleeves to accomplish what-ever task lay before her. Growing up during the Revolutionary War and throughout a period of political unrest brought Abigail face to face with the struggle of early American life. By the time she reached adulthood, Abigail was prepared for what her future had in store.

Abigail first met her future husband, John, as a teenager. The couple “mar-ried in 1764, when Abigail was twenty and John, almost ten years older, was an ambitious young lawyer in Boston” (Roberts 7). Their early days of marriage, how-ever, were not blissful because the couple spent much time apart. John was away from home due to the rebellion against the British, and he depended on Abigail “to function as his eyes and ears on the home front” while he was working at the Continental Congress and served as a diplomat in France, Holland, and England (Roberts 7). After about five years, during which John and Abigail saw each other very little, Abigail eventually joined John in England. However, this pattern set the trend that would endure throughout the marriage: much time spent apart. The distance that separated John and Abigail never crippled their relationship, though, because Abigail “struck up a correspondence with [John] that lasted for decades and that happily survives” (Roberts 6). In the end, John and Abigail Adams were married for 54 years.

John and Abigail maintained a strong marriage through their correspon-dence, and their love for one another is evident in their many letters. As Woody Holton says, “John and Abigail exchanged 1,200 letters over four decades” (“Abi-gail’s Last Act”). Abigail always opened her letters, “My Dearest Friend,” and in their letters, Abigail and John discussed both personal matters and politics. One of Abigail’s most famous letters to John stated: “In the new Code of Laws . . . Remember the Ladies . . . if particular care and attention is not paid . . . we are determined to foment a Rebellion, and will not hold ourselves bound by any Laws in which we have no voice, or Representation” (qtd. in “John”). Abigail believed that women should have rights in the emerging American nation, and she made her thoughts clear to John; this is a subject that would become increasingly important to Abigail.

Demonstrating women’s strength, Abigail was the caretaker, provider, and financial person at home while John fulfilled his political responsibilities in Phila-delphia and Europe. She managed the family farm and sold goods that John sent from abroad (Roberts 7). As Holton says, “John put Abigail in charge of all the Adams family finances, and she ended up handling her husband’s money much better than he ever had, primarily because she was open to more risk” (“Abigail’s Last Act”). Abigail also fulfilled her family responsibilities, raising her children and taking care of elderly relatives (Roberts 7). In addition to those responsibilities, Abigail also faced the threat of the British throughout the Revolutionary War. The Adams’ son, John Quincy, explains, “my mother with her infant children dwelt, liable every hour of the day and night to be butchered in cold blood, or taken and

87

carried to Boston as hostages” (qtd. in Roberts 7). Abigail’s sheer resilience was in-credible, and it allowed her fuel to fight for women’s rights, as she “protested from time to time that women were the best Patriots because they were handling all of the hardships and suffering all the sacrifices for the American cause, but they would not hold high office or even be able to vote if they won” (Roberts 7). This resentment was often expressed in her letters to her husband and would come to fruition in her final will, which will be discussed later.

Individuals today can learn valuable financial lessons from Abigail Adams, who, as Holton says, “made money during one of the rockiest periods of our na-tion’s history” (“What Would Abigail Do”). Abigail’s first bit of advice would be “to invest with your head, not your heart” (Holton, “What Would Abigail Do”). Abigail was also fearless in her investments; during “Shay’s rebellion, a farmers’ revolt in Massachusetts, [that] sent bond prices plummeting in late 1786, she ignored advice from her uncle Cotton Tufts to sell her federal securities and instead instructed him to buy more” (Holton, “What Would Abigail Do”). Abigail knew not to panic and that prices would eventually return to their normal levels. Her financial savvy allowed her family to prosper during a time when many struggled financially. Since America is now in similar tough financial circumstances, we can gain valuable in-sights from Abigail. She clearly had the ability to capitalize on the opportunities of smart spending and investment, even during times of economic instability.

Another bit of advice that we can learn from Abigail is to “stay coy while bargaining” (Holton, “What Would Abigail Do”). According to Holton, “when buying real estate, Abigail instructed her business agent not to reveal that he was representing her until a hard bargain was struck. She worried that a seller who knew he was dealing with the wealthy Adams would demand a higher price” (“What Would Abigail Do”). Abigail also always negotiated to get a fair price. Holton gives an example: “after John became president, a tax collector tried to pay [John] the compliment of giving the Adams mansion in Quincy, Massachusetts the highest valuation in town . . . when Abigail protested, the assessed value of the house was lowered and they paid less tax” (“What Would Abigail Do”). Clearly, Abigail was a woman to be reckoned with.

But Abigail’s savvy did not stop at finances. She also had great political skill. As Cokie Roberts says, Abigail was there to support her husband for every step in his career:

For twenty years, starting before the Revolution when he was off in Philadelphia helping draft the Declaration of Independence in 1776, up through his successful run for president in 1796, Abi-gail kept her husband apprised of what was brewing politically. Trusting her judgment entirely, John used his wife as a source of information and a sounding board during his long years in public service. (6)

From the moment that John Adams announced his campaign for the presidency after George Washington’s death, Abigail served as his chief advisor and political strategist. She knew that Washington’s death would be a prime opportunity for John to garner positive publicity. As Roberts says, “always on the lookout for what

88

she saw as her husband’s best interests, [she] would get out front on this tragedy to milk it for all it was worth politically” (2). As a result, John became a viable candi-date for the office.

The hard-fought political battle was the first time in American history that we witnessed two very polarized political parties, “John Adam’s Federalist party – which advocated a strong central government . . . and Thomas Jefferson’s Repub-lican party—more inclined to support states’ rights” (Roberts 8). Adams emerged victorious in the election and became the second president of the United States; however, his rival, Thomas Jefferson, became the vice president. This was the first time in U.S. history that the president and the vice president were from two dif-ferent political parties, and John Adams depended on his wife to give advice as he navigated the politics of the situation.

Even through stressful and exhausting political periods, John and Abigail exemplified what many seek in a relationship: love, trust, and the ability to com-municate openly with one another. John and Abigail comprised the nation’s first “power couple” (“John”). As Withey says, “Abigail’s political thinking was in close agreement with John’s, and the two of them discussed politics extensively” (45). Their ability to communicate was truly astonishing, and the couple grew closer as they took on the difficult challenges presented by the presidency and the new American nation emerging from the Revolutionary War. During John’s presidency, a time when the U.S. remained vulnerable to other nations and to internal unrest, the couple helped to define the roles the President and First Lady would play in future generations.

When Adams became president, the White House was “huge, expensive, requiring thirteen fires to keep it warm, and unfinished — not one room was com-pletely done, and there was famously no place to hang the laundry” (Roberts 43). Abigail could not move to Washington immediately because of home and family obligations in Quincy, so the White House remained in disarray until her arrival, demonstrating how much John depended on her. It is also said that, at this time, John felt overwhelmed and “more and more helpless without Abigail’s advice” (Withey 247). When she finally arrived, Abigail physically arranged and decorated the White House, making their home welcoming. But, at the same time, she also made her mark politically by making appearances, commenting on policy, and in-fluencing John and other politicians in Washington.

Abigail employed sly methods of persuading and influencing others, espe-cially with respect to political subjects. A strong example of her approach was the pro-Adams letters she sent to editors for publishing: “She quietly sent letters and articles [written by John Quincy] supporting John’s policies to friendly newspaper editors with instructions to publish them. They always complied. Abigail was always specific in her instructions to the editors; she told them exactly which passages to publish and which words to change so the author’s identity would be concealed” (Withey 253). Even at the time, other people recognized her powerful influence because, as Withey says, “she received frequent letters from office-seekers asking her to intercede with the President, and she answered many of them” (253). However, Abigail always used her abilities to do what she thought was best for her family and

89

her country, even if that meant stretching the rules at times and overstepping the boundaries placed upon women in her era.

The next presidential election did not unfold in John’s favor, as he lost to the family’s nemesis, Thomas Jefferson. Abigail, of course, provided an analysis of the election, exclaiming, “the election pivoted on the votes of New York City, organized by Aaron Burr and the Republican party . . . and South Carolina’s deci-sion to abandon Charles Pinckney, in favor of Thomas Jefferson sealed the Federal-ists’ fate” (qtd. in Roberts 44). Still, Abigail’s unwavering devotion to her country remained, as she said, “I wish for the preservation of the government and a wise administration of it [no matter who is in office]” (qtd. in Roberts 44). In a move his wife undoubtedly approved, before he left office, John Adams composed a judiciary bill that would allow him to expand the third branch of government and appoint justices during the lame duck session, much to the dismay of Jefferson. It was a final, bold statement by a man who had the example of a bold wife, a fitting end to a brilliant presidency. The ultimate personal reward was that, however unhappy Abigail was with her husband’s defeat, it appeared that she and John would finally be together without interruption.

In addition to being a political advisor, Abigail Adams was a devoted mother and grandmother. During the time, it was commonly believed that moth-ers had the sole responsibility for child-rearing and that if a child grew up into an irresponsible, unproductive adult, the mother was to blame. Abigail took this re-sponsibility to heart and “the weight of the responsibility sometimes seemed impos-sibly great, especially as the children got older” (Withey 32). According to Withey, Abigail “believed very seriously that mothers were primarily responsible for training their children to become moral, God-fearing, useful adults” (30). Therefore, “her children’s education and moral development were much more serious problems for Abigail than their physical wellbeing” (Withey 30). In spite of this pressure, Abigail did an excellent job, and she went on to raise a son who was “one of the nation’s greatest diplomats and its sixth president,” John Quincy Adams (Akers 1). Although some of her children were not as successful as John Quincy and brought distress to her later in her life, she remained hopeful, supportive, and proud of her children’s accomplishments. As a wife and mother, Abigail successfully faced and conquered many of the challenges and conflicts that all wives and mothers face in both their personal and professional lives.

Women of the past and present can relate to Abigail’s struggle to balance her domestic role as a mother with her “professional” responsibilities as First Lady. Abigail not only had to manage a household single-handedly, but she also had the duties of running a farm, managing the family’s finances, and caring for and raising her children. Abigail was not a social-elite who was removed from everyday American life. Her family situation brought her closer to the American people and allowed her to better understand the struggles and possible solutions to the chal-lenges that all Americans, especially women, faced.

As mentioned earlier, throughout her life, Abigail used her influence as First Lady to advocate and advance women’s rights. What perturbed Abigail the most was “the legal degradation that women had to submit to the moment they

90

got married” (Holton, “Abigail’s Last Act”). Women who were not married or who were widowed were allowed to own and control property, but married women were not. In a letter to John, Abigail wrote that wives’ property was “subject to the con-troul [sic] and disposal of our partners, to whom the Laws have given a sovereign Authority” (qtd. in Holton, “Abigail’s Last Act”). Clearly, she was displeased with this. Therefore, she not only voiced her feelings, but she took action. As Holton says, Abigail “did not simply complain about the government’s denial of married women’s property rights . . . she defied it.” She began setting aside a portion of John’s property and, as the Revolutionary War came to a close, declared it her own (Holton, “Abigail’s Last Act”). In subsequent years, she continued to add money to this stockpile and invested it wisely: “by the end of 1815 [Abigail’s] ‘pocket money,’ as she sometimes called it, had grown to more than $5,000” (Holton, “Abigail’s Last Act”). Abigail was able to accumulate her own self-proclaimed wealth as she tested the rules of society. An unusually financially successful woman, Abigail set the stage for the issue of women’s rights to be tackled head-on.

Abigail’s will contained the culmination of her fight for women’s rights and her final push for equality for women. When Abigail felt she was nearing her death, she composed a will. While this does not seem unusual today, at this point in history, such an act would have been considered preposterous (Holton, “Abigail’s Last Act”). Holton points out, “Since she had no legal right as a married woman to own property in her name and her husband was still very much alive, scratching out a four-page document was the ultimate act of rebellion” (Holton, “Abigail’s Last Act”). Nevertheless on January 18th, 1816 she sat down to write her will (Holton, “Abigail’s Last Act”). In her will, Abigail allocated most of her money to married women, leaving only a few token gifts to her two sons, because she not only wanted to assert her own right to property, she wanted to assert that right for other women too. Abigail gave little to nothing to her grandsons, nephews, and male servants (Holton, “Abigail’s Last Act”). John’s unwavering love and respect for his wife was apparent even after her death, as “Abigail’s will was not a legal document that any court was bound to respect, and John would have been within his rights in throw-ing it in the fire . . . but he honored it to the letter” (“John”).

As she aged, Abigail found comfort in her grandchildren, who kept her youthful spirit alive. However, removing herself from the political limelight also had a drastic effect on her outlook and viewpoint. As Withey says, “Abigail became more tolerant in her opinions and behavior. She reduced somewhat her efforts to dominate her children and grandchildren; she became more moderate in her political views and less hostile to political opinions differing from her own; and she patched up quarrels with old friends” (299). Ever the hard-worker and caregiver, Abigail spent the remainder of her life caring for friends and family, many of whom were seriously ill. Finally, on October 28, 1818, Abigail died at age 73 of typhoid fever: “her illness was brief and without pain . . . her mind and her wit remained sharp” (Withey 313). Abigail clearly retained her caring nature, her wit, and her intelligence throughout her life.

Abigail Adams leaves behind not only a legacy of financial and political brilliance, but also of courageous willingness always to question the status quo. The

91

moment Abigail stepped into the role of First Lady, she took a far more active role than what would have been expected after the example of Martha Washington. Heavily involved with the political events and issues of the nation, Abigail constant-ly communicated her opinions to others, especially her husband, whose position of power allowed him to implement some of her ideas. Her vocal and active role set the standard in identifying not only the role of the First Lady, but also her scope of power and ability to make an impact. A fierce advocate for women’s rights, Abigail constantly questioned the laws and stereotypical views that belittled women.

Abigail not only set a precedent in her role as First Lady, but also as a femi-nist who continually fought for women’s rights. She was a critical source of strength and intellect throughout her husband’s presidency, and she has become an integral part of our nation’s history. What she leaves behind is a legacy of patriotic devotion to her community and nation, an unending devotion to her husband and children, and firm belief in equality for women. Abigail is an inspiration to all mothers, po-litical figures, and feminists, as she was the emerging all-American woman who will remain an icon throughout history.

Works CitedAkers, Charles W. Abigail Adams: An American Woman. Toronto: Little, Brown,

1980. Print. Barker-Benfield, G. J. Abigail and John Adams. Chicago: U of Chicago P, 2010.

Print. Holton, Woody. “Abigail Adams’ Last Act of Defiance.” American History 45.1

(2010): n. pag. America: History & Life (EBSCO). Web. 6 Feb. 2011. ---. “What Would Abigail Do?” American History 45.1 (2010): n. pag. America: His-

tory & Life (EBSCO). Web. 6 Feb. 2011. “John and Abigail Adams: The Original POWER COUPLE.” American History

43.1 (2008): n. pag. America: History & Life (EBSCO). Web. 6 Feb. 2011. Roberts, Cokie. Ladies of Liberty. New York: HarperCollins, 2008. Print. Withey, Lynne. Dearest Friend: A Life of Abigail Adams. New York: The Free Press,

1981. Print.

Portfolio Reflective Essays

At the end of each term, students are asked to write a portfolio reflective essay in which they think about the writing they have done over the course of the term and reflect upon what they have learned and how their writing has improved. Students are asked to quote from their own papers as they examine their progress. Presented here are two examples of reflective essays.

In “A Change of Heart,” his reflective essay for Term I, Christian Bruce ’14 reveals how, although he was at first hesitant because of the workload, he has come to value the course because “the Freshman Writing Program has remedied [his] faulty thesis statements, troubled topic sentences, and passive voice.” In “Cait-lyn Bacon: A Work in Progress,” her reflective essay for Term II, Caitlyn Bacon ’14

92

likewise explores areas in which she improved, and she also discusses the fact that writing is a process and a life journey, which is one of the most important lessons any writer can learn. As she says, “There are always improvements to be made, but I am proud to be ‘a work in progress.’”

A Change of Heartby Christian Bruce ’14

I entered this world of Elmira College with a fear of something people called “Freshman Writing.” I first heard of this class when I was on a Gold Key tour of the campus. We entered Alumni Hall and my tour guide, Renaldo, began discussing the courses Elmira requires its students to take. He told me I would learn about different cultural practices in a course called Freshman Core. I told him that I liked world history, so I thought this class would broaden my mind and teach me about different civilizations. Renaldo then described the other required class, Freshman Writing. I told him I was taking AP English, so I would not have to take it. He said that, although I would receive credit for my AP course, everyone must take the Writing class. During our discussion, I heard the words “class on Saturday morning” and “twenty-page paper,” and I thought I was going to hit the floor that instant. I looked at my mom and said, “Well, so much for going to this college.” She insisted the course would make me grow as a writer. During the ride home, I was adamant I was not going to some class on Saturday when I should be sleeping, and, more importantly, there was no way I could write a twenty-page research paper. After twelve weeks of Freshman Writing, I am proud to say I survived! I can now confidently write a paper and not be afraid of a three to five page requirement. During Term I, I have improved my writing skills. My greatest ailments the Fresh-man Writing Program has remedied are faulty thesis statements, troubled topic sentences, and passive voice.

The greatest improvement I have made is forming a solid thesis sentence. I remember learning about thesis statements from my eleventh grade English teacher. She taught an entire lesson on what not to do when writing, but she never gave a clear description of a good thesis statement. I was left confused, and made my own assumptions about how to write an adequate thesis. When I wrote my summer paper on The Adventures of Tom Sawyer, I was sure that I had written a successful paper with a good thesis. My thesis statement professed, “By creating a person that has a mind of his own, I was able to add some of my own content while preserving Twain’s tone of voice” (“Tom Sawyer Summer” 1). From my personal experience, I believed that was a well designed thesis sentence; however, with the assistance of my Writing professor at Elmira College, I learned the flaws of the statement. Freshman Writing taught me that a powerful thesis statement often contains three strong points I am trying to prove in my essay. The thesis establishes the structure of the whole paper.

My professor showed me that a basic thesis statement is designed in a way such that it states, “the topic of the paper will prove x, y, and z.” The first

93

body paragraph supports point x, paragraph two supports point y, and the third body paragraph supports point z. Ideally, when the paper is finished, there will be an introduction, at least three body paragraphs, and a conclusion. Of course, a paper’s structure and thesis can vary depending on the word count requirement. For example, my twenty-page paper was very long and had a broad thesis statement because the paper encompassed a large amount of information. Overall, though, over the course of the term, my thesis statements evolved from a simple sentence to a complex, three-part statement like what I wrote in my Constitution paper: “When homeland security is threatened, the freedoms granted in the Constitution cannot be withheld because the amendment violates other amendments, undermines the system of checks and balances, and contains extremely vague wording that does not provide a basis for implementation during times of crisis” (“Constitution Day Paper” 1). This was an enormous improvement from the beginning of the course. I now understand why a paper needs a strong thesis.

Once I mastered the art of the thesis statement, my new task was to start writing effective topic sentences. I knew that I should start a new paragraph when I have a new idea to discuss in a paper, but I did not realize that I needed to introduce that idea with a topic sentence. My professor taught me that topic sentences are like small thesis sentences and must be used at the beginning of each new paragraph. A topic sentence establishes what a paragraph will prove and must refer back to the overall thesis statement. In my Constitution paper, one of my topic sentences intro-duced the idea that “this proposed amendment is unconstitutional” (“Constitution Day Paper” 3). The sentence specifically refers back to the part of the thesis that states, “the amendment violates other amendments” (“Constitution Day Paper” 1). Here, my topic sentence tells my reader what to expect in the paragraph. In the Writing course, I learned that a proper topic sentence makes a statement that helps prove the thesis, and the rest of the paragraph provides support for that statement. Therefore, if the topic sentences are written correctly, they should reveal all the arguments in an essay.

More so than any other issue, my Achilles heel in writing is passive voice. I love to use passive voice; however, my professor helped me realize that passive voice weakens the clarity of my writing. Although the sentence may look the same as a sentence using active voice, there are important differences. Active voice clarifies a situation in writing and makes the text easier to comprehend. The Norton Field Guide to Writing says, “When a verb is in the active voice, the subject performs the action (she caught the ball). When a verb is in the passive voice, the subject receives the action (the ball was thrown to her)” (Bullock and Weinberg HB-18). This style of writing can be confusing and can degrade the quality of academic papers. In a simple example of active voice, a sentence would make a statement such as, “Mark Twain wrote The Adventures of Tom Sawyer,” but passive voice changes the structure of the sentence to say, “The Adventures of Tom Sawyer was written by Mark Twain.” Although I still catch myself writing in passive voice, I can recognize it and imple-ment active voice.

Although my initial reaction was negative, I have benefited from the Fresh-man Writing Program and I have become a confident writer. I am glad I listened to

94

my mother and decided to become a member of the Class of 2014 because I am now impressed by the improvements I have made as a writer. I can write a compelling thesis statement with supporting evidence, form argumentative topic sentences and focused paragraphs, and remove passive voice from my essays. And who would have known that I, Christian Bruce ’14, could successfully write a twenty-page research paper? I cannot say that I am ready to publish my first top-selling novel, but I am proud of the accomplishments that I have made in Freshman Writing, and I believe that its rigor sets Elmira College ahead of other colleges. I can now brag to all of my friends during holiday break. Even though they laughed at me because I was going to Saturday morning classes and writing papers every week, I completed a fifty-page Freshman Writing 1010 portfolio, a task most of them will never accomplish, and, since I have now finished Term I, I will never again have to attend a Saturday morn-ing class.

Works CitedBruce ’14, Christian. “Constitution Day Paper.” Elmira College, 11 Dec. 2010.

Print---. “Tom Sawyer Summer Paper.” Elmira College, 4 Sept. 2010. Print.Bullock, Richard and Francine Weinberg. The Norton Field Guide to Writing with

Handbook. New York: Norton, 2009. Print.

Caitlyn Bacon: A Work in Progressby Caitlyn Bacon ’14

Now that the second term of the Freshman Writing Program is coming to an end, it is time to look back on what I have accomplished throughout the year. This term has been a completely different experience for me. In Term I, we were bombarded with paper after paper each class, and who could forget those Saturday classes? I know I was ecstatic that those were over, but an end to that brought the second half of the program. The focus this term was on more complex papers. As I wrote my essays this term, I learned that I am a consistent writer who still struggles with pitfalls. As mentioned in my previous Reflective Essay, during Term I, I fo-cused on analysis, creating a strong thesis, and improving my language (Bacon ’14, “Reflective Essay” 1). In Term II, I focused on furthering analysis, decreasing awk-ward word choice and sentence structure, and using the correct tense throughout my essays. Over the course of the year, my writing has progressed from mediocre to polished.

The second half of the Writing Program was more relaxed than the first. All I remember from last term was worrying about revising my shorter papers while the twenty-page paper was hanging over my head. However, because this term was more relaxed, it helped me consistently focus on my writing problems; this consis-tency is one reason why this term was a little easier to handle. I was already con-scious of the flaws in my writing; it was just a matter of fixing them the first time around as opposed to revising draft after draft.

95

The first paper of Term II was a Mark Twain essay on the Adventures of Huckleberry Finn. Before I wrote this essay, I recalled the very first essay I wrote for Elmira College. My Tom Sawyer essay was awful; it lacked a thesis and did not pro-vide much analysis. The thesis I wrote for the revised draft of my Tom Sawyer essay is stronger than the thesis in my first draft, but it is not nearly as strong as the thesis I would write for my Huck Finn essay and my other essays in Term II. My revised Tom Sawyer thesis was: “The girls in Mark Twain’s novel are not involved in any of the adventures like Tom. The character I chose to write about was one who actu-ally participates in these adventures” (Bacon ’14, “Tom Sawyer Summer Paper” 5). This thesis is workable, but my theses from this term are more specific. Take, for example, the thesis from my revised Huck Finn paper: “The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn includes several different dialects that enhance the story and is from his per-spective, which make up for some of the other topics that may be considered a little risqué” (Bacon ’14, “Huck Finn” 1). This statement not only sounds better, but it represents the mature writer I am becoming. I never would have thought I was ca-pable of writing this well. The thesis is one of the most important parts of the paper, so I am glad I have learned to write one that will set up a focused essay.

Another important aspect of a well-written essay is analysis. I struggled to provide thoughtful commentary to support my thesis during Term I. Now I am more aware of where analysis should be placed and on which points I should ex-pand. I have also learned that whenever I add a quote to elaborate on the point I am making, I must justify why I include the quote. Quotes should always be explained as opposed to just dropped into the essay. The same is true with all information in an essay. For example, throughout my ten-page paper, I provided information on King Henry VIII and his six wives, but all of that is irrelevant if I never explain how it pertains to my thesis. Here is an example of some of the analysis I provided in my ten-page paper: “People based their opinions of Henry on the way that he treated his wives. This shows that they are more worried about what scandalous things Henry was up to, rather than showing concern for the political actions” (Bacon ’14, “Ten Page” 2). Not only do I explore Henry’s achievements, but I also discuss how his wives affected the way the general public viewed him. Improving my analytical skills will be of great use to me in future classes. For example, as a science major, I can apply these skills to interpreting results for lab reports.

A skill I still need to focus on is word choice. Paper after paper, I receive comments about awkward and unclear language. Although I know this is a reoc-curring problem, I find it difficult to improve. An example of this issue is: “Each part focuses on different things” (Bacon ’14, “Leonardo” Draft I 1). This sentence is not only short, it is vague. “Different things” is a poor choice of words because it does not convey any meaning to the reader. After seeing that this was not the best sentence, I was able to revise it into something more conclusive: “Each part of the book focuses on a different aspect of da Vinci’s work, such as beauty or order” (Bacon ’14, “Leonardo” Draft II 1). Sometimes I am able to catch these mistakes after reading my essay aloud, but I am not guaranteed to find these errors, so I have learned that it is helpful to have someone else read my writing because a friend can

96

point out where my language sounds vague. Finding mistakes myself is a skill I still need to work on, but I can already see improvement in this area.

Another aspect of my writing that I can continue to improve is using the correct verb tenses within a paper. I learned from Term I that fiction is always dis-cussed in present tense, which was a hard concept for me to grasp at first. I always thought that fiction was already written so it should be discussed in past tense, but I learned that, because books are continuously being read, and therefore the events occur repeatedly, they should be discussed in present tense. Now that this concept is clear to me, I always discuss fiction in present tense. I have even applied this new-found knowledge to my essays for Core class.

Although I have learned from many experiences throughout my freshman year, the Freshman Writing Program has been one of the most beneficial. I was able to have my writing assessed by teachers and peers to my benefit. Receiving extra input from tutors has also been very helpful for me. I listened to different points of view, which has helped me understand how readers in general find my work. Hear-ing someone’s opinion of my work helps me see errors that I may not have caught on my own, and it is one of the best ways to approach revising a paper. As I get older and wiser, I hope to create better papers. I know I am not the best writer enrolled at Elmira College, but I also know there is nothing wrong with that. As of now, I am content with the strides I have made throughout two rigorous terms. There are always improvements to be made, but I am proud to be “a work in progress.”

Works CitedBacon ’14, Caitlyn. “Huck Finn Language Paper.” Draft II. Elmira College, 8 Apr.

2011. Print.---. “Leonardo Paper.” Draft I. Elmira College, 4 Feb. 2011. Print.---. “Leonardo Paper.” Draft II. Elmira College, 8 Apr. 2011. Print.---. “Reflective Essay.” Draft I. Elmira College, 11 Dec. 2010. Print.---. “Ten Page Paper.” Draft II. Elmira College, 25 Mar. 2011. Print.---. “Tom Sawyer Summer Paper.” Draft II. Elmira College, 17 Sept. 2010. Print.

Encore Paper

Encore is the College’s performing arts requirement. Although Encore is not a part of the Freshman Writing Program, it is a requirement that all freshman and sophomore students must complete to earn their degrees from Elmira College. For their Encore papers, students are given a variety of questions from which to choose, and they approach this assignment in individual ways. The paper presented here addresses the question of how Encore can be applied to other first-year re-quirements at Elmira College. In “The Power of Hard Work and Commitment,” his Term II Encore paper, Zachary Barbour ’14 writes a very well-structured essay on how applying the lessons learned in Encore helped him come to appreciate the value of working hard and remaining open-minded.

97

The Power of Hard Work and Commitmentby Zachary Barbour ’14

As I traveled to Elmira College to attend Freshman Orientation, I thought to myself that I had already discovered everything there is to know about myself. I had thought that leaving home at the young age of fourteen to attend a boarding school that was over a thousand miles and a country away had caused me to mature into the man I would become. However, as Term I at Elmira College began, I quick-ly learned that I had much more personal discovery to do. Through my experiences at an academically rigorous boarding school, I thought that I had mastered how to balance my course load, athletics, and social life. However, I quickly discovered that I was incorrect. I found that, at college, the level of academic rigor was much higher, my athletic practices were more demanding, and my social commitments were more time consuming. Through attending a variety of performances in the Encore program, I have witnessed first-hand performers who have mastered such balancing acts. It is truly beautiful to witness someone who has mastered his or her field of the performing arts, and it is inspiring to know the level of hard work and commitment that these performers devote to their craft. I can apply the lessons learned from Encore to the rest of my educational experience at Elmira College because the performances have shown me the power of hard work and commit-ment and also how my educational experience can be enriched through pursuing knowledge outside my comfort zone.

First, I can apply my experience of the Encore program to the rest of my educational experience because it showed me firsthand the power of hard work. In order to reach such a high level of skill, all of the Encore performers had to commit much of their time to rehearsal and practice. For example, Michael Klotz’s performance displayed how many hours of practice result in a beautiful end prod-uct. Because his viola playing was accompanied only by a piano, in order to create a complete sound, Klotz had to master all aspects of a score. Unlike performing in a classical orchestra, where sounds are divided among different instruments, in order to successfully perform a score using only one or two instruments, one must master many different aspects of the score. Through utilizing changes in tempo, key, and accents, Klotz was able to build a sound that mimicked a whole string sec-tion using just one viola and one piano. It undoubtedly took him many hours of practice to create this effect. Many may dismiss this tactic and label it unnecessary or impractical. However, pursuing mastery of a musical score that is atypical allows the musician to broaden his skills, just as taking a required class that a student may deem “unnecessary” broadens the student’s outlook. Through Klotz’s hard work and commitment to master the viola to create the illusion of a full orchestra, he showed the value of committing hard work to elements of our education that we may at first label unnecessary. By committing ourselves to these facets of our liberal arts education, we are able to create a sense of accomplishment.

Furthermore, I can apply my Encore experience to my overall educational experience at Elmira because it showed me the power and effects of commitment. One performance where this commitment to music was most evident was the Buffa-

98

lo Philharmonic Trombone performance. Although these men already display their commitment to music itself through their involvement in the Buffalo Philharmonic Orchestra, their effort to showcase just the trombone as a solo instrument in this performance was amazing. Very few composers write solo music for the trombone because the instrument usually plays a supporting role both in the orchestra and in the brass section. The musicians at the Encore performance, however, showed their deep commitment to the trombone by taking the time to arrange suites to display the versatility of the instrument. Instead of taking the more efficient solution, such as using a brass instrument that has a readily available supply of solo arrangements, they remained loyal to the trombone and committed many hours of their time to arranging music to make this performance possible, beautiful, and inspiring.

I have applied the lessons I learned from Encore about hard work and com-mitment when fulfilling my community service project at a local hospital. Although this aspect of my freshman experience at first seemed incredibly difficult and not an efficient use of my time, after I completed my community service, I could see how the requirement caused me to feel much fulfillment. Although I had to spend my only free afternoon during Term I pushing around wheelchairs, running around the hospital making deliveries, and filing endless amounts of paperwork, at the end of my sixty hours, I could truly see the value of this aspect of my education. Although I was emotionally and physically fatigued every time I left the hospital, on my walk back to campus, I felt a sense of fulfillment and pride. Even though at first I sometimes felt that the tasks that I was completing for the hospital did not make a big difference, I came to realize that, by helping the hospital run more efficiently, I allowed the healthcare workers to provide faster and higher quality care. Although one may think that the time commitment and hard work required of community service is just a graduation requirement, I now know that volunteering my time served a greater purpose.

Another lesson from Encore that I can apply to the rest of my educational experience at Elmira College is that our educational experience can be enriched by taking risks, going beyond what is expected, and pursuing knowledge outside our comfort zone. In order to become immersed in a true liberal arts education, one must experience things that are out of the ordinary and sometimes uncomfortable. Likewise, in the arts, to fully understand one’s skills, one must be willing to take risks. For example, the classical performances of Sarah Beaty and Ashu featured in-struments that are not usually showcased in the classical light. Ashu’s performance of the classical saxophone revealed how an instrument that is excluded from most classical ensembles can be a classical instrument. In pursuing a musical genre that is out of the ordinary realm for most saxophonists, he showed how we can enrich our educational experience through risk-taking. Instead of just sticking to what is normally performed, or, in our case, what is required to graduate, we should expand our horizons and experience new things. This lesson was furthered in Sarah Beaty’s performance of the classical clarinet. Although the instrument featured in this case has a place in most classical woodwind sections, it is not usually a solo instrument. Therefore, as mentioned with Michael Klotz above, there are very few solo arrange-ments available for the clarinet. As a result, Beaty arranged piano pieces for the

99

clarinet. Through taking a risk, she demonstrated how pursuing music outside of what is usually expected can create something truly beautiful.

I applied the lessons I learned through watching Ashu and Sarah Beaty when approaching topics of discussion in my Core class. Although I thought that I was already open to and conscious of many of the differing views throughout the world, through Core I discovered that I was also unaware of many views and ideas. Although many see Core as just another requirement, when applying the lessons learned through watching Ashu and Sarah Beaty to the class, I realized that this exposure to ideas and things outside our comfort zone is vital to our development. Because I took an open-minded attitude toward my Core class, I have been able to learn much over the past two terms. This knowledge and open-mindedness will con-tinue to help me in the future in my nursing career when I inevitably interact with patients and other healthcare professionals whose views may differ from my own. My experience in Core has also helped me to discover that the study of societies greatly interests me. I now have a new passion that I will be able to pursue through elective courses throughout my education.

In conclusion, although the main goal of the Encore program at Elmira College is to teach students about various classical composers and proper theatre etiquette, it served a much greater purpose in my educational experience. Through attending various performances throughout the academic year, I have learned first-hand the power of hard work and commitment, and my educational experience has been enriched through pursuing knowledge outside my comfort zone. I have also applied these lessons to my other educational experiences. I now realize because of community service that hard work and commitment do pay off and, through Core, I have learned the benefits of taking a more open-minded approach to my studies. As a result, I now have a new academic interest that will also be useful in my future career.

selected freshman essays 14

Documents

freshman writing program

guidance writing lecturers

summer writing assignmentpart

mark twain studies

selected freshman essays

director of publications

lord chesterfields letters

twain project