The Real and Ideal

These writings demonstrate the emergence of an increasingly distinct American personality. The roots of independence and freedom expressed in the writings of last week seem to have blossomed in transcendentalists such as Emerson and later Thoreau. I was intrigued by Emerson’s speech to university students. He continually emphasized the importance of living and collecting experiences. His idea of genius certainly deviates from the previous tradition of the Puritans, who highly respected and embraced the ideas of previous generations and books. Emerson passionately explained creativity and genius as creating something new rather than always rehashing something old. I loved his line: “Life is our dictionary.” Whitman’s poetry is rife with both the interconnectedness of self and the celebration of the link between all humanities and their experiences. Certainly Whitman’s sensuality and sometimes sexuality would have made many of the earlier writers turn red in the cheeks. There is more freedom in Whitman’s, Dickinson’s, and even Poe’s poetry than in earlier writers. Dickinson and Poe especially seem to take great advantage of rhythm and meter to add emotional intensity to their poems in an evolved way.

I was particularly intrigued by Hawthorne’s “The Birth-Mark.” Hawthorne seems to be struggling himself with the role science is to play in society. Should it be elevated to the level of a god, or will it prove itself to be less than expected or potentially destructive in unforeseen ways? Even more interesting was his introduction of the tension between the reality and the ideal. Aylmer (I wonder about the significance or meaning of this name) seems ever cursed to pursue perfection and thus to fail. Even his science experiments leave him lacking and more recklessly driven to finally achieve complete success. I wonder whether Hawthorne was commenting upon society’s ever-present drive to achieve more.

This ideal/real paradigm made me think of Thomas Hardy’s Tess of the d’Urbervilles. Although the novel was English and written later than Hawthorne’s works, Hardy was dealing with the same human struggle between the flesh and the ethereal, the real and the transcendent. Aylmer’s obsession with Georgiana reaching perfection reminded me greatly of Angel Clare’s rejection of Tess after he finds out she was been “spoiled” or is morally less than perfect. Clare professed himself to be socially progressive and beyond the moral conventions of the day, yet he acted traditionally. He found Tess’s moral “spot” repulsive, despite the purity of her character and the depth of her utter adoration and devotion to him. Similarly, Aylmer cannot appreciate the beauty of Georgiana with a spot of earthiness upon her. In many ways, Clare destroys Tess just as Aylmer destroys Georgiana. It seems both men are only capable of loving the ideal, the woman they have created in their own mind rather than the flesh and blood before them. Hawthorne has always intrigued me as an author with his subtleties and open-ended symbolism. It seems Hawthorne is issuing a warning against only desiring the ideal and thus sacrificing or overlooking the potential beauty of the current reality. I find it fascinating that two authors with such different backgrounds writing in different countries could write about such similar characters. I suppose it shows the universality of the human heart. It also shows a connectedness between America and the rest of Europe. Even while America was trying to distinguish herself as a individualistic nation, she too struggled with the same overarching issues of love and truth and beauty like the rest of the world.

Utopian Nation

People will always be people. Whether Puritans, Europeans, Native Americans, or modern readers, there is a certain quality to human nature that extends throughout centuries regardless of circumstances. The Puritans attributed it to the fallenness of human nature; some might insist this humanness is a product of society. Regardless, I find the mixture of improvements and degradations that went on in early America fascinating and often sad. The Puritans left to create a new type of utopia in this “New World,” apart from the corruption, the restriction, and the rigid formality of their homeland. America began on a principle of optimism that in some ways still carries to today. J. Hector St. John de Crevecoeur expressed the glorified vision of America in his letters from an American farmer: “The American is a new man, who acts upon new principles; he must therefore entertain new ideas, and form new opinions.” This is a weighty statement, to assume that man can recreate the nature that has been evident for thousands of years.

Upon reading various works, from Mary Rowlandson’s journal to Pontiac’s speech, I found numerous holes in this utopian America. It seems that the very problems the Pilgrims and Puritans left in Europe followed them to the New World. Believing they were the elect, the Puritans came to claim a new Jerusalem. They left behind systems of thought and tradition but still brought seeds of prejudice and a fear of the “other.” I find it interesting that these new Americans were essentially the “other” in the eyes of their native countries. They longed for something new, as Crevecoeur expressed. However, changing locations did not change some of the more deeply rooted issues of humanity. The tension between the Native Americans and English settlers is painful to read about and to remember as part of our nation’s history. Neither side of the conflict was necessarily wrought with evil intentions but rather with opposing motives. Even a confused and desperate Mary Rowlandson recognizes elements of humanity in the Native Americans despite her fear and views of their actions as the Devil's handiwork. It’s remarkable to think that within 150 years in this new utopia, war had already broken out, murders had been committed, prejudice established--all by people equally human, equally intelligent, equally capable of love and hate. This “city on a hill” that the Puritans envisioned was still populated with people and thus ever rife with both accomplishments and with suffering.

In the midst of misunderstanding and some of the darker sides of human nature, it was refreshing to read more positive perspectives from men such as Thomas Jefferson and Benjamin Franklin. These men seemed to take into account cultural distinctions between the colonists and the Native Americans, rather than attributing differences as signs of lower intelligence or savagery. It seems that America is ever struggling between the ideal and the reality. Our government is founded upon ideas of equality and the sanctity of human life. Less than a hundred years later, however, American men were fighting and killing one another on American soil. America tolerated slavery and the slaughter of Native Americans. Yet at the same time, America stood against tyranny and provided new economic opportunities, social mobility, and greater freedom. America is ever chasing her “city on a hill” image, ever attempting to be the utopian nation imagined of old. There is an ever-present tension between the vision and the reality of carrying out the vision. The nation seems both supported and hindered by this humanness that is inescapable, capable of great sacrifice and great atrocity. These readings surrounding the birth of America highlighted for me the extreme human potential both for good and for evil, for selflessness and for selfishness.