Anthony Fothergill's "Cannibalising Traditions: Representation and Critique in Heart of Darkness"

"... there would be a glimpse of rush walls, of peaked grass-roofs, a burst of yells, a whirl of black limbs, a mass of hands clapping, of feet stamping, of bodies swaying, of eyes rolling under the droop of heavy and motionless foliage." 

Fothergill's essay sets out to explain how during the 19th century, the combination of literary and scientific observations about the African "Other" established, and later reinforced, biased assumptions about the African natives, that not only affected Conrad's Heart of Darkness, but other literary works published around the same time.

Key Points in Fothergill's Essay:

• Due to establishment of travel and missionary writing in the media, Europeans were engrained with a biased impression of Africa and its inhabitants. Fothergill states, "anybody going to Africa for the first time had in a sense already been there; carried, consciously or not, cultural luggage containing well-established assumptions, and expectations, and imaginative constructions of 'the African'" (pg 446). Therefore, those traveling to Africa viewed Africa with a biased lens that in turn would affect their opinions and experiences regarding the continent.

• Fothergill also claims that representations and assumptions regarding the Africans were shaped by the scientific, religious, and social atmosphere during the time. Modern science was used in an attempt to understand these "primitive" people. Fothergill says that, "the perceived cultural implications of Darwin's theory of evolution and by archeological discoveries made in the wake of colonial expansion" eventually "reinforced even as it modified the terms of earlier literary representations" (pg 447). Also in regards to the culture of 19th century Europe, World Exhibitions presented stereotypical understandings of different races. Religion was also used to explain the African "Other," as the story of Ham in the bible was used to explain the characteristics and inferiority of the African people.

• Fothergill then moves on to explain how Heart of Darkness fits into the "contradictory cultural field"of the time because "it embodies a radically ambivalent tendency in representing the Other" (pg 449). Marlow's narrative is quite contradictory, because although at times it embraces the stereotypical representations of "savages," it also has the tendency to question as to why these people are seen as savages and the "enemy." Fothergill states, "[Conrad's] representation of the African offers a self-conscious critique of Europeans representations, even to the point of questioning the very basis of such Otherness." Fothergill uses two key scenes that exemplify Marlow's confusion regarding the natives, on pages 33-35, as well on page 36.

Atonement

My first encounter with the word atonement happened sometime around early 2008, when the movie Atonement, based on the novel of the same name by Ian McEwan, was in theaters. I saw the movie; however, I did not understand the meaning of the title under a year or so later when I finally learned the definition of atonement. Atonement is defined by Dictionary.com as "satisfaction or reparation for a wrong or injury; amends." Those familiar with the plot of Atonement will find the title to perfectly represent the meaning of the novel/movie. I only read the novel recently, but it is one of my favorites, hence why I was so interested in researching the word atonement. I believe that atonement holds such a powerful meaning -- far more than words like amends or reparations. Atonement also often contains a religious connotation, as the concept of atonement is prevalent in Judaism and Christianity. I look forward to discovering more about the religious and secular meanings of atonement throughout history.

Katherine Swynford & John of Gaunt, Duke of Lancaster

Born in 1350, Katherine Swynford was the daughter of Sir Payne de Roet, a Flemish herald from County of Hainaut. At the age of sixteen, Katherine Swynford married "Hugh" Ottes Swynford, a knight from the manor of Kettlethorpe in Lincolnshire. She had three children with him: Blanche, Thomas, and Margaret. Hugh Swynford died sometime before she started her affair, but the specific year is not know. She originally worked for John of Gaunt as a governess for his two children, Philippa of Lancaster and Elizabeth of Lancaster. The Duke's wife, Blanche, had Katherine's daughter Blanche (her namesake) placed into the same chambers and allowed the same luxuries of her daughters. John of Gaunt also served as the godfather to her daughter Blanche.

After Blanche died from the plague in 1369, Katherine and John of Gaunt started a love affair that would produce four children out of wedlock. Their relationship endured through the Duke's second marriage to Infanta Constance of Castile, and after she died in 1396, the couple finally married in Lincoln Cathedral. Unfortunately their marriage only lasted three years. John of Gaunt died three years later in 1399. Katherine outlived him by four years. Their four children are John Beaufort, Henry Beaufort, Thomas Beaufort, and Joan Beaufort.

Source

Wealtheow's Internal Monologue

During my time at Hart I've become quite the effective moderater. Even before I came here I stabilized the feud between my dear brother Hygmod and Hrothgar. Coming here at first was extremely difficult, I'll admit, but I believe I have found an importance place here at Hart. Now I feel as though my job is to maintain harmony between my newly acquired tribe. Life, after all, is all about balance. Although I miss my brother and the Helmings dearly, I have finally grown somewhat accustomed to life with Hrothgar. He is strong-willed and stubborn, but ever since the attacks the fire in his eyes that once was diminishes by the day. Although my grace has been said to cast spells over others, my presence has no power to cure Hrothgar's anxieties. He won't talk to me about his emotions, but I can tell by his tensed brow and somber expression that he is deeply tormented. Alas, I have no power to console his woes. Every day I pray for Grendel to leave us alone, so the ferocity and passion will return to my beloved husband. I dream of the day where the people of Hart can live in peace.

I also sense a deep disturbance within poor, orphaned Hrothulf. He such a gentile, quiet boy but I sense something, to be it into simple terms, different about him. Sometimes I watch him as he sleeps. At times his sleeping face is serene, like an undisturbed stream, but other times I can tell he's in the midst of a terrible nightmare. During times like these I feel as though I should wake him, but for some reason I cannot bring myself to. I cannot even fathom what he dreams about considering his past, but unfortunately I know that his troubles are far from over. Although I try to make him feel as accepted as my own two sons, he knows as well as I do that he is not the same as them. One days my babes, the ones in which Hrothulf treated as his brothers, will have supremacy and rulership over him. He does not acknowledge this of course, in fact he barely speaks at all. While other boys his age are roughhousing, fighting, or courting, he prefers to either be alone, or in the company of an old man I know to be named Ork. Although the relationship is strange, I'm glad he has found at least some companionship. I doubt that Hrothgar knows, for he's too consumed with his own issues.

L'influence de la langue française

After the William the Duke of Normandy conquered England in 1066, the aristocracy was dominated by French speakers. Although those at the top spoke French, the peasantry of the country remained English-speakers. Although the French-speakers and English-speakers remained separate at first, over time the two languages began to merge due to either intermarriage, business, or simply interactions between the two. English was "demoted to to everyday, unprestigious uses," while French was the language of "the court, administration, and culture" (Lawless). During the occupation over 10,000 French words were added to the English language. Out of these 10,000 words, about three fourths of them are still used in Modern English. It's estimated that the average English speaker "who has never studied French already know 15,000 French words" (Lawless). In fact, there are about 1,700 identical cognate words between the two languages. The incorporation of French into the English language also contributed to one of English language's large amount of synonyms.

Sources:
http://french.about.com/od/vocabulary/a/frenchinenglish.htm
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/English_language

"The Reading Monster" by Patrick Brantlinger

1. Brantlinger claims that Frankenstein can be considered a political novel in some aspects. The novel was published only a couple decades after the French Revolution and the Enlightenment in Europe. Brantlinger believes that Victor Frankenstein can represent aristocratic oppression of the Ancien Regime. Likewise, the monster is a representation of the working-class. With these comparisons in mind, Victor can be seen as the powerful aristocracy overpowering the poor, in this case, the monster.

2. Frankenstein is a novel evaluating education, or rather "miseducations" in regards to science and literature. Both are very prevalent in the novel; Victor is constantly pursuing knowledge, in particular science. Brantlinger evaluates Mary Shelley portrayal of science -- she expresses the transformation from alchemy to modern science. Brantlinger claims that in the novel it is unclear as to whether the monster's creation is contributed to science or "black magic."

Literature is a very important aspect in the monster's life. Through his self-taught education by his accidental exposure to literature and his exposure to the family, he able to gain not only literacy, but human reason. Brantlinger does acknowledge that may be difficult for readers to accept the monster's literacy. Regardless, the monster's desire to join the family is similar to Victor's desire to obtain scientific glory, both of which fail in their pursuits.

3. Brantlinger also acknowledges the confusion about the monster's identity. The majority of those not familiar with novel assume that monster's name is that of his creator's. Although this is a shorter point in Brantlinger's essay, it still brings up an interesting point... why has the monster taken on the name Frankenstein? He believes that "because the monster is nameless, it makes sense to give him his father-maker's name." Brantlinger claims that the monster can be a representation of Victor's identity, or possibly Victor's alter-ego.  

  

Mary Shelley's Attitude Toward Victor Frankenstein

Mary Shelley portrays Victor Frankenstein as a complex character. On one hand, he believes that his creation will make a wonderful new species. He will be held responsible for such a noble discovery, and that idea excites him. As he progresses with his experiment, he begins to become obsessed; his creation completely consumes him, causing him to forget about his family and home back in Geneva. I think by portraying Frankenstein in this insane manner, Shelley portrays her belief about the dangers of modern science, and also obsession. Frankenstein's obsession leads him to do things that repulse him, like collecting bones and human remains. Although he feels some guilt, his encompassing passion convinces him to proceed with his experiment. 

Throughout the novel, Shelley gives the impression that she is Romantic writer. This is evident due to the contrast of scenes that take place when Victor is in a laboratory and when he is amongst nature. While he is creating the monster, he is filled with insanity and neurosis. He cannot sleep, nor does he interact with his loved ones. In contrast, Victor is the most content and at ease when he is in the presence of nature. Even after the monster is created, and William and Justine have died, he finds some solace in the company of nature. Victor's demise begins when he sacrifices himself to the powers and dangers of science. His succeeds in bringing the monster to life, but the creation is portrayed as a grotesque act, a far cry from his vision of glory.

Shelley portrays Victor in such a way that causes the reader to feel pity for him, but with an understanding that he is responsible for his toils. It is clear that Victor's demise was all his doing. He is responsible for the deaths by the monster, causing the reader to feel sympathy for the monster, not Frankenstein. Even before the reader discovers what the monster is capable of, and Victor's experiment is only in its early stages, Shelley makes it evident that this creation will only cause problems.