1913 Armory Show and it's relation to modern literature in that time

After browsing through the gallerys of the Armory Show I noticed a connection with the art being displayed to many of the concepts I am currently studying in modern american novels of the 20th century. Two of these pieces of work stood out to me the most, and these are the ones I've decided to speak about.

This piece clearly speaks to the use of nature in the 20th century as an outlet. When viewing this paiting it reminded me of Whitman and his poem Song of Myself. I see the sky, the land, animals and humans all coexisting together. It also shows a modern example of labor in the early 20th century as it appears there is farm work and phsycial labor being employed as a means of survival.

This photo immediately reminded me of the separation and isolation of women and men which comes up in many writings of the 20th century. While viewing this painting I thought of Dickinson and her feelings of isolation, Gilman and her struggle for independence in The Yellow Wallpaper and Freeman with her demands for equality and recognition from her husband in The Revolt of "Mother".  There was a bond between women in the 20th century between women which is portrayed in this painting.

"Crazy", or just claiming their freedom?

Recently in class, we read two short stories about women who refuse to sit back and take conditions they don't agree with. The first of these was "The Yellow Wallpaper", and the second is "The Revolt of 'Mother'" . In each of these stories the mother in the story decides to take a stance against the patriarchal values and social norms of her household. In The Yellow Wallpaper we see the narrator triumph over her stifling husband in the end. In The Revolt of 'Mother' the wife takes a stance against her husbands wishes and also ends up triumphant. Also, I found it interesting that in both stories the the wives are viewed as "crazy" by other characters in the story. The narrator in The Yellow Wallpaper is clearly viewed as crazy by her husband and her home visitors, for she is kept up in the attic with barred windows and a locking door. In The Revolt of 'Mother' we see a similar stance taken by the other characters of the story as Mother becomes a sort of town spectacle, and the townspeople stop what they are doing to go by her home and see what she has done. Neither of these women care what anyone else has to say about their wishes, including their husbands. Rather than remain confined to conditions they are not happy with, they make a change in their life, and defy their traditional gender roles while doing so.

(As a side note, I also found it really ironic that in both stories the chief complaint about the living conditions was the peeling and tattered wallpaper. I do not know if my Professor intended us to notice this shared quality, and I'm not sure if the wallpaper holds any special significance to the stories, but I found it interesting.)

FREEDOM!

Recently in class, regardless of who we have been discussing, we seem to return to this concept of freedom.  What does freedom mean to you?  What does freedom mean to me?  Am I free right now?  Are you free?  All of these questions are explored by the writers we have been studying.  Below I have examined what I believe to be the ideal form of freedom for Whitman, Emerson, Douglass, and Dickinson.

Whitman: 

 "Stop this day and night with me and you shall possess the origin of all poems, You shall possess the good of the earth and sun . . . . there are millions of suns left, You shall no longer take things at second or third hand . . . . nor look through the eyes of the dead . . .nor feed on the spectres in books, You shall not look through my eyes either, nor take things from me, You shall listen to all sides and filter them from yourself."

Here Whitman describes freedom as the ability to get close and develop a personal relationship with nature and the world around you.  His ideal form of freedom would be someone who is exploring and learning for themself, first hand, using their own senses, and coming to their own conclusions, all based upon personal exploration.

Emerson:

"The world is nothing, the man is all; in yourself is the law of all nature"

I think that here Emerson shows a very similar idea of freedom as Whitman.  Emerson also describes personal and individual thought and idea as true freedom.  Finding answers within oneself, experiencing, observing, and concluding for oneself.  When being held to the ideas and standards of those around you, rather than personal and individual thought, you will not be free. 

Douglass:

"This battle with Mr. Covey was the turning-point in my career as a slave. It rekindled the few expiring embers of freedom, and revived within me a sense of my own manhood...My long-crushed spirit rose, cowardice departed, bold defiance took its place; and I now resolved that, however long I might remain a slave in form, the day had passed forever when I could be a slave in fact."

Douglass describes mental and personal freedom, despite physical enslavement.  Even though he was a slave he states he still had "embers of freedom".  Even though he was a "slave in form" he did not allow himself to be "a slave in fact".  Douglass shows that true freedom lies within oneself, and lies within your mind.  Although he had the appearance and form of a slave he did not in fact allow himself to be enslaved.  Douglass' body was enslaved but Douglass as a man was not.

Dickinson:

"They put me in the Closet --

Because they liked me "still" --

Still! Could themself have peeped --

And seen my brain -- go round --"

Dickinson's idea of freedom is very similar to that of Douglass.  She also describes a situation in which she was somehow held captive, in some way, yet her brain continued to "go round".  Just like Douglass she explores the idea of still being a free person by way of your thoughts, regardless of where you are physically.  Although "they" thought she was being kept still, "they" could not keep her mind from continuing to explore.  For Dickinson freedom is mental, not physical.

eMiLy DiCkInSoN CoNt...

They shut me up in Prose --
As when a little Girl
They put me in the Closet --
Because they liked me "still" --
Still! Could themself have peeped --
And seen my brain -- go round --
They might as wise have lodged a Bird
For Treason -- in the Pound --
Himself has but to will
And ease as a Star
Abolish his Captivity --
And laugh -- No more have I --

     The word that poses the most questions for me in the above poem is the word PROSE.  This first line does not seem to fit with the rest of the poem, but of course it has to fit, it is the first line! But what does she mean by "they shut me up in Prose"?  The rest of the poem seems to be speaking about being confined, yet finding a way to break that confined state.  So is the whole poem about her finding a way to break away from prose?  It would seem to me that as a writer prose would be the least confining as there are no meter or rhyme scheme requirements for prose, so how could someone be "shut up in prose"?  Perhaps she is referring to not being able to write anything else but prose...was she shut up in prose because she was not permitted to write poetry?  And the rest of the poem is about how she broke away from prose and wrote whatever she wanted anyways?  Is this why she often wrote in private, why she didnt publish her poetry while alive?  There are more question marks in this blog than periods so as you can see this word is boggling my mind and leaving me with more questions than answers.  Sorry I could not have been of more help in answering these questions but hopefully they have given you some good things to think about in regards to this poem.

  

Emily Dickinson

They shut me up in Prose --
As when a little Girl
They put me in the Closet --
Because they liked me "still" --
Still! Could themself have peeped --
And seen my brain -- go round --
They might as wise have lodged a Bird
For Treason -- in the Pound --
Himself has but to will
And easy as a Star
Abolish his Captivity --
And laugh -- No more have I --

They shut me up in Prose --
Who is "they"? Why is Prose capitalized?

As when a little Girl
Why is girl capitalized?

They put me in the Closet --
Again, who is "they"? Why is Closet capitalized?

Because they liked me "still" --
Why is still put in quotations? Is this sarcastic? Which definition of still is she using here?

Still! Could themself have peeped --
Is the definition of still here different than the way it is used in the previous line?

And seen my brain -- go round --
Who is seeing her brain go round? Why does she use brain rather than mind, as usually one's mind will race or go round, while the brain is stationary in the head?

They might as wise have lodged a Bird
Why is bird capitalized here? Why is she comparing herself to a bird?

For Treason -- in the Pound --
In the pound does not seem to fit here, what is she saying here? Why is pound capitalized? How does a bird commit treason?

Himself has but to will
Who is himself?

And easy as a Star
Why is star capitalized? Why are stars easy? How are they easy?

Abolish his Captivity --
Who is holding him captive? Who will abolish this? Who is he?

And laugh -- No more have I --
What is the significance of her use of dashes? In this line and in the whole poem?

     My professor recently asked me to examine what is meant by the idea of freedom, keeping in mind three recent literary works we have studied recently: Walt Whitman's Song of Myself, Ralph Waldo Emerson's The American Scholar, and Frederick Douglass' Narrative of the Life of Frederick Douglass, An American Slave. My initial instinct was to examine and write about how each of these author's ideas about freedom differed from one another. However, as I attempted to take this avenue I found myself ending up back to one overwhelming thought...that the ideas of freedom in these three literary works do not differ, but are instead eerily similar. Although each literary work is very different, one is an essay, one a poem, and the other a narrative, they all revolve around the idea of man being an independent being, capable of independent thought and choice.
     In Emerson's essay he stresses the importance of learning for yourself through processes of first hand observation and discovery.  To Emerson freedom means being able to study, examine, analyze, and think for yourself, rather than being held to arbitrary, narrow and didactic methods of education and thought. Whitman portrays freedom as being carefree and in harmony with nature as well as other human beings, and having the ability to openly experience and overtly appreciate the beauty of the world around you. Douglass plays with two ideas of freedom, physical freedom and mental freedom. However he shows in his narrative that as long as one is mentally free they can never truly be physically a slave, that freedom lies within yourself, and your ability to continue to imagine, dream, think, and educate yourself. 
     In each example freedom relies solely upon the individual. Each person has to take responsibility for their own freedom. It is up to me whether or not I will be held captive to the ideals of my peers, country, government, family, teachers, friends, and the like. I can be physically free, while at the same time allowing myself to be mentally enslaved. Or, I can be physically enslaved, and at the same time remain a free being within my thoughts and beliefs. All three of the above authors agree that if you want to be free the choice is YOURS!

http://etext.virginia.edu/etcbin/toccer-new2?id=Whi55LG.sgm&images=images/modeng&data=/texts/english/modeng/parsed&tag=public&part=1&division=div1

http://www.emersoncentral.com/amscholar.htm

http://sunsite.berkeley.edu/Literature/Douglass/Autobiography/

The American Scholar-By R.W.E.

“The American Scholar“: “Each philosopher, each bard, each actor, has only done for me, as by a delegate, what in one day I can do for myself.“

When Emerson says this line in his speech I think that he is saying a true scholar will learn and do things for himself rather than study what has been learned by others.  Rather than reading the philosophies that have been so carefully thought by others he would carefully think for himself.  Instead of only reading the poetry of great bards he would use the inspiration gained from these poems to write his own.  He would not only view the emotions portrayed by actors but would feel and experience those emotions himself.  Philosophers, poets, actors and writers who have created great works were not book-worms, they were true scholars.  Great poems and plays are not written by men who sit and study the poems and plays of others, they are written by men who experience life and put it on paper eloquently and powerfully. 

If you have not read R.W.E. speech titled The American Scholar I recommend you do.  At first I found this speech, this essay, long and boring; after reading it more than once, clearing up my misunderstandings, looking up words I did not know and disecting it in class I found it to be incredibly eye opening.  If I want to be a scholar, if I want knowledge, if I want to know about life, the way to do it is to go out in the world and experience and live life, to view things first-hand rather than study them second or third hand.  That is what I plan to do.