Paine: In the introduction to Common Sense in our textbook, Paine is praised for using “simple language” and “biblical references”. While his language may not seem simple to the modern ear, I think that he does show simplicity in boldly laying out a plan rather than just spouting patriotic rhetoric. This kind of “get down to business” attitude can be appreciated by the “simple folk” as well as philosophers because it is concrete, something you can really wrap your mind around, and something that can be debated easily. The only example I found of a biblical reference was in Paine’s reference to the King as “the Pharaoh of England”. Here he is subtly comparing the Americans to the Israelites in the Bible when they were enslaved in Egypt. This is a very effective comparison because God was on the side of the Israelites and supported them in miraculous ways. It was the Israelite’s destiny to come out from under Pharaoh’s dominance, and here I think Paine hopes to convey that same idea of destiny and Divine favor towards the cause of American independence. Paine feels that the “King of America” should be the law. I find this a very astute statement. I think that Paine’s ideas are common sense. His point that no other solution besides independence could bring lasting happiness is, in my opinion, a true one. The Crown and the Colonies had gotten to the point where their goals did not line up any more, and no agreement could be reached without one majorly conceding to the other, which neither party would have been pleased with. I do agree with his ideas, especially his statement that “Could the straggling thoughts of individuals be collected, they would frequently form materials for wise and able men to improve into useful matter.” I think that is the best form of government, with lots of people giving input, with a few wise and able people consolidating the ideas into the best solution for everyone.
The Declaration of Independence: The introduction of the Declaration of Independence section states, “The famous words of the preamble, included below along with the concluding paragraph, remain far better known than the list of accusations aimed at the King that Jefferson also added”. In the section included in the book, the King is accused of “injuries and usurpations,” and of establishing “an absolute tyranny over these States.” Jefferson goes on to elaborate on these in the parts of the Declaration not included in the textbook. Most interesting to note is what was not included: Jefferson’s denunciation of slavery that was in the original draft, accusing the King of first enslaving Africans and then leading them in insurrections to wreak havoc in the Colonies. This part was left out of the final document due to complaints from many of the (mostly Southern) delegates. The declaration in the preamble that “all men are created equal” did not alter the status of women and slaves, nor was it meant to. I don’t think the men who crafted the Declaration considered women and slaves to be included in “all men,” or even worthy of mention. The introduction to this section says, “The idea… meant that free citizens were politically equal” (emphasis added). This was actually a pretty radical notion at the time, but these men would have considered the equality of the sexes and races as beyond radical into utter madness.
Wheatley: In this section, Phillis Wheatley is writing to Samson Occum in response to his letter to her in which he criticized “Christian ministers who spoke of liberty while owning slaves” (textbook, pg 195). Wheatley writes that “in every human breast, God has implanted a Principle, which we call Love of Freedom; it is impatient of Oppression, and pants for Deliverance.” She addresses the “strange absurdity” of the conduct of those Americans who promote slavery, crying for Liberty while exercising “oppressive Power over others.” Yet Wheatley shows passive acceptance of slavery in the poems included in The Great Awakening. She says that it was mercy that brought her from Africa to America, because there she learned about God and Christ. She seems to express that African slaves can be the spiritual equals of white men with lines like, “You shall be sons, and kings, and priests to God,” and “Remember, Christians, Negroes, black as Cain,/May be refin’d, and join th’ angelic train.” I guess this does defy the bondage of slavery a little, but in these poems she doesn’t actually talk about any liberty other than spiritual. Kidd writes, “Thomas Jefferson, for one, dismissed her poetry with a sneer.” Jefferson called her poetry “below the dignity of criticism.” Kidd says that Jefferson needed Wheatley’s poetry to be so, because “it might jeopardize his assumptions about African Americans’ intellectual inferiority to European Americans.” I agree with that statement. Jefferson seems to be a very confused individual when it comes to slavery. One the one hand, he owned slaves, and believed them intellectually inferior, sneering at Wheatley’s poetry. On the other hand, he felt the need to denounce slavery in the original draft of the Declaration of Independence.
No comments:
Post a Comment