assertion journal

When we were talking about shame and guilt, and which characters each represented, I believe that Chillingworth was a reminder of Hester’s shame and guilt. When Chillingworth arrives in town, or when he speaks to Hester alone, Hester is ashamed of her adultery and having her husband know the truth. She agrees to keep his identity a secret, and in some ways facilitates his plan for revenge. She ignores Chillingworth, and doesn’t tell Dimmesdale who he truly is, up until the end of the novel. Hester’s silence shows that she does not want Dimmesdale to know that her husband is still living, and has actually befriended him. Hester knows that her husband is alive and knows about her sin, and she lives with the guilt of her adultery. To Hester, Chillingworth acts as a reminder to not only her infidelity, but also her broken vows as a wife. Chillingworth’s presence shames Hester into keeping his identity quiet, and reiterates her sin.

A

I am in disagreement with Courtney Wick with her statement that Pearl acted as Dimmesdale's shame and that every time he looked at her was a reminder of his regret. I do not agree with this because, one, Dimmesdale was full of guilt, not shame, and two, it specifically says in the text that Pearl was bonded towards Dimmesdale and the two got along very well. If anything, Hester would be the source of Dimmesdale's guilt and anytime he saw her, he would feel sinful for it was with her that the sin was committed. Yes, Pearl is a direct result of their promiscuousness, but she is not the source of his pain.

Also, the event where Hester and Pearl were in the Forest and Pearl asked about the scarlet A and about the 'black man' led to another source of symbolism. As the two are walking through the Forest and talking, Pearl unknowingly asks if Dimmesdale was the 'black man.' This can symbolize Dimmesdale as a sort of evil and that he was the main cause of all this suffering and abandonment for he, quite simply, couldn't keep it in his pants.

Another source of symbolism derives from the meteor in the night sky forming an 'A.' I was perceived by the village people that it stood for angel, in regards to Governor Billinghams death. This perception can relate back to the first question with the quote “It is to the credit of human nature, that, except where its selfishness is brought into play, it loves more readily than it hates.” The village people's assumption that the 'A' in the sky meant angel, proved their selfishness. They were so hung up in their own lives and well-being for themselves that they automatically saw the 'A' as a benefit to themselves, for instance, the angle would be looking over them. The fact that the people never even put the 'A' in the sky to the scarlet letter on Hester's chest proves that they were very self absorbed and selfish.

I raised my hand in class but I was cut off by the bell, so this is my contribution to the discussion:

The notion of whether the American Revolution was a social revolution or not is based on an individuals perspective. If the American Revolution was being compared to, lets say, the French or Haitian Revolution, then no, it was not much of a social revolution. The Haitian Revolution was a complete social revolution where the slaves managed to not only gain freedom but the power to govern themselves. The bourgeoisie in France took complete control of power from the aristocracy, compared to America, where there was no real shift of power from one class to another. On the other hand, if you compare America's revolution to a Middle Eastern Nation's social revolution, where there has not really been one, then yes, the American Revolution was a social revolution. This argument can be taken from many, many different angles all with legitimate explanations and support. Also, the definition of revolution could be debated of whether it literally means a radical movement towards change, or, in America's case, being the beginning of change in political, social, and economic structure.

Incendiary - The Death Penalty in American Discourse

Read the article at this link.

The death penalty has long been a point of contention in American discourse. Many people who support the death penalty cite the guilty person's lack of respect for life as proof that the person deserves to die. Others deny the claim that pro-death penalty advocate make by asserting that the death of one innocent person is reason enough to avoid giving anyone the power of life and death over another.

The question becomes a question of purpose. If we believe that the penal system is intended to correct people (hence, the Department of Corrections), can we support a penalty that denies people the right to change? Should the death penalty exist if even one innocent man or woman can be killed in error?

Most stories about innocent people being killed on death row are apocryphal at best, but the article "Trial by Fire" discusses a potential case of mistaken execution.

So, read the article and respond to the author's assertion. Defend, challenge, or qualify the author's assertion in an organized and well-reasoned response.

Happy Thinking,

Mr. B

Grapes of Wrath/Death of a salesman

I actually like reading both of these pieces. I did find it a bit annoying though when Steinbeck would base a whole chapter on something not very significant in Grapes of Wrath; the chapter on the turtle crossing the road? I wasn't so sure why that was significant. For Death of a Salesman, I read the intro after I read the play because it helped me grasp the intro a bit more. I attempted the intro a few times at first and was not following it at all, so I figured that if I knew the characters, it would make more sense to me, which it did. Oh, and just to make sure, the rubber pipe that Willy uses is a gas line, correct? Other than these little complications I enjoyed both of these works and thought that the messages of the American identity and the American dream were portrayed quite evidently.