Homework for Tuesday

1. Study for your mid-term exam. Bring a blue book on Tuesday.
2. Group A comment on one of the blog posts by 11:59 pm Friday night.

Free writing on what you learned from the Civil War poetry unit

Here's a compilation of your free writing on the Civil War poetry unit. I also received an excellent drawing of a bearded Confederate that I wish I could post on the blog.

Poetry

- poems have numerous layers of depth in them
- multiple meanings of poems
- double meanings
- I'm horrible at reading poetry but I have learned a "process." Read once (or twice) to gain the literal meaning and again for literary devices. Look for a metaphoric meaning. Words often have more than one meaning. Think about who the speaker is and who he is talking to. Remember, there can be more than one possible speaker. Are there allusions? What meaning might they add to the poem? Is the punctuation unusual? How does this affect reading?
- when reading poetry, don't take anything at first glance; have to look at literal and symbolic meanings
- everything needs a second glance
- significance of poetic form
- form has meaning too
- read MORE DEEPLY!!!
- historical and Biblical allusions
- in this unit I learned about how poets incorporate their perspectives into the issues of the times

Dickinson

- biographical facts about Dickinson (more than I'd expected) that help tie together loose things I've learned about her over the years. I think Dickinson could have been better about putting herself into society, but it's not my place to judge. Had she been a man she may have done things differently.
- Dickinson's poems were about the Civil War but she was not a direct spectator. I don't think Melville was either.
- random capitalization
- strong nature imagery and concentration on death
- I definitely enjoyed Dickinson's poetry; I feel like it captured the essence of poetry because every poem evoked some sort of mental image or feeling.
- twists and turns; secret meanings; no titles; focus on death--only the coffins; the still ends of battle
- Dickinson is focused on the silent bodies; the photography; still succumbing, overpowering, death
- Autumn --> fall or Civil War
- red wheel rolling in blood, may be Antietam collecting bodies
- Alabaster grave: tomb grave; irony: meek shall inherited the earth but engraved; interchangeable verses between volumes; later about the passing of time
- Dickinson's poems tend to seem very straight-forward when in actuality they can trick you
- Civil War - cause of mental disturbance for Dickinson
- Dickinson was a very intense person
- Dickinson's poems are so metaphorical that they can be taken even as a non-Civil War poem because the soldiers suffering share readers' humanity
- Dickinson wasn't totally crazy! Her poems had good meanings that pertain to everyone.
- Dickinson was so secluded but she wrote about topics that could relate to anyone. A lot of her poems are literally not about the Civil War, but she usues a lot of metaphors to talk about the Civil War and its bloody nature.
- I learned a large amount about how to interpret Emily Dickinson's poetry. Previously I viewed it as dry and boring; now I have learned that it is necessary to simply make random connections to words and phrases in her text.
- Dickinson's poetry was difficult to understand completely and I felt like I was missing her intended references to the Civil War.

Melville

- Melville must have been very articulate to be able to twist words so nicely
- I now think of Melville as clever, if I had to put him into one word. He clearly keeps his audience in mind and write two different things in one.
- Melville's poems confused me because I am not knowledgeable about the Civil War.
- more bold; Shenandoah!; titles; but the irony of battle; raucus beginning
- Melville focuses on explosive beginnings and ends of war. His words are resounding, drawing on these great mythical figures.
- shadow of body lies in Shenandoah
- the thought processes of the speaker in Melville's poems are similar to those of Delano: the tone changes, the attitude shifts
- Melville thought war to be "boyish"; soldiers naive/ignorant
- Melville tried to write from a holistic American perspective when writing about the Civil War, rather than limiting himself to a Northern or Southern perspective
- Melville's writings, with their abolitionist values, are valuable for getting across a Northern point of view.
- conflicting sentiments: debate of antislavery? in "Benito Cereno"; "Fall of Richmond" celebrating the end of the war/slavery
- Melville still confused about pro/anti-slavery
- Melville wrote his poetry to show how he was against the war and so most of his poems are ironic.
- Melville has a more sarcastic/ironic tone in some of his writings
- Melville's writing seems to criticize


Dickinson and Melville


- Melville's titles helped in how direct it was. Dickinson's title were edited in later.
- I didn't see as many similarities between Dickinson and Melville as I did with works in the sea narratives unit. The subject matter was similar, but Dickinson's poetry was left up for interpretation. Melville's poems we read were all obviously about the Civil War.
- Dickinson's poems were more open to interpretation. For example, "It was not death for I stood up" could mean a number of things. You can say it was a Civil War death but it could be a close family death. Melville is more direct (for the poems we've read); it's easy to tell which battle/Civil War event he is referring to
- both made riddles in their poetry, but with Melville it is more clear who he was talking about--the clearly listed names. Dickinson spoke in more general terms about the soldiers dying and the difficulty of war. It seems as if Melville was more political and Dickinson had more of a general statement
- I appreciated Melville's poetry more than Dickinson's because it was straight-forward in addressing the Civil War as its topic.
- Melville looks at more specific scenes while Dickinson looks at the war as a whole
- I think it is fascinating to contrast Dickinson and Melville, especially since she stayed in her house all day and he sailed all over the world. I wonder if that contrast says something about how they wrote.
- both were from the North (2x)
- Dickinson and Melville were both just observers of war, yet Melville gives more opinion on it
- both had to base their knowledge on information presented through news and images
- as spectators they still got facts and such right
- Dickinson and Melville both tried to convey the complexities and tragedies of the Civil War
- Dickinson was able to incorporate her perspective on the issues of the times more effectively than Melville since she seems to also connect the themes of her poems to timeless archetypal themes, while Melville's poems seem much more grounded in his era.
- a sense of irony (2x)
- Dickinson made statements on the universal themes of death; Melville was more specific, yet packed lots of meaning and irony to still make some point.
- Melville and Dickinson understood, even in their poems at the beginning of the war, how serious the Civil War was bound to become
- these poems weren't necessarily written to make readers feel a certain way about the war, but rather to explain Melville's and Dickinson's personal feelings
- I feel like between the two I prefer Dickinson over Melville. She seems to do better justice to the deep emotional pain associated with war time. Melville seemed to put the war time reports to a poetic meter and then sprinkle in classical allusions. But that may be a "gender-biased" interpretation of their work
- both tie Civil War into poetry; Melville's poetry is more ironic, Dickinson's is more relatable
- Dickinson and Melville were very moved by the Civil War---much more than I had previously thought.


Civil War

- I learned a lot about the Civil War, both the facts of it and how people living at that time felt about it. In high school we spent one brief unit on the Civil War in American history in 10th grade and almost never brought it up again. I never before got to read about the thoughts and opinions of people who lived it, which I find very interesting. My perception of the thoughts of the North from the little I learned was more of a "we're right, you're wrong" mentality, and I liked reading Dickinson's struggles with it. Furthermore, I find it fascinating how differently things are taught in diferent regions of the country. For example, in AP US Govt and Politics, my class was told that only powerless people go to war.
- execution of John Brown Oct. 2
- I did learn a great deal regarding the literal sense of the Civil War: John Brown, Antietam, McClellan, Manassas, and so forth. It is very important to understand the historical context of the poems in order to fully appreciate the poetry.
- Civil War battles are named differently by the North and the South
- connection between a cycle of nature and war/ death and life
- Civil War sparked questions of religion; moral issue with widespread death
- Antietam = bloodiest
- Death Death Death --> good summary of the Civil War
- death and dying associated with the war is evident in both sets of poems; both authors seem to grasp the negative outcomes that will have resulted from the war
- How does America deal with death? They're separated from direct action and they have a way of drawing conclusions from a broader perspective.
- McClellan a hero; Grant likened to God; generals elevated to god-like status
- metaphors and allusions used to create the sense that war is a repeating tragedy (almost like it is timeless)
- the Civil War had a deep impact on all Americans; tone of death, loss, destruction
- someone not directly effected can have a strong opinion about war as well
- history has a great effect on writers
- naivete of young soldiers in the beginning of war...leading to depressing loss/struggle
- overall struggle/debate of knowing what is right or how to feel about the war
- what do writers do when they are faced with a war? They can explain things in a way that runs deeper than North or South...hit on the humanity involved in the wars.
- people aren't satisfied by the war --> focused on battles, results of the war, rather than causes, like why we went to war in the first place
- many cryptic messages related to the Civil War
- allusions to Civil War in poetry aren't always obvious
- knowing background of Civil War helps to be able to understand poetry
- knowing who John Brown was made the poem "The Portent" [better...? the last word was cut off, so I'm guessing that's what you wanted to say]
- I learned a lot about the Civil War that I never knew before, and I found it interesting that the different regions can have such a huge impact on one's outlook.
- Civil War discussed more in southern schools

Slavery

- one can read a message about slavery in ANYTHING! (it's amazing)
- less about slavery and more about deaths of soldiers
- these works, and "Benito Cereno," showed how some authors of the time approached the image of the US and part of its history with slavery, human rights. Like the first unit, those authors were able to comment on the behavior of people in the US and whether or not their actions were appropriate (Civil War and continuation of slavery for so long)

And one late-breaking thought on the sea narratives unit:

The problem of a narrator strikes me: first we had Pym who was cocky and prone to exaggeration; in"The Heroic Slave," Mr. Listwell waxes terribly sentimental while the protagonist himself is just too good to be true; in "Benito Cereno," we experience limited 3rd at the hands of the terribly naive also sentimental Delano. Further, out of the 3 books, we only really want to root for Madison: I just can't support anyone else.

Prefer Dickinson's poetry to Melville's

I liked Melville’s poems, but not as much as I like Emily Dickinson’s. The meaning behind Dickinson’s poems seem more subtle because of her carfeul use of metaphors and imagery. While Melville employs imagery as well, it just seems more obvious to me. For instance, in the poem the Protent, I instantly pictured a lynching. Even if there is a deeper meaning to this poem that I am overlooking, Melville’s word choice seems to bluntly portray this image, and I feel locked into it for the rest of the reading. Dickinson’s poetry on the otherhand includes words which have many double meanings and her metaphors often work with each other to create more than one possible meaning. Also, in the poem The Victor of Antietam, I felt like Melville’s rhyme scheme was very forced. Some of the lines, while related, did not seem like they should necessarily follow each other, and it seems as if he placed them one after the other just to enforce his rhyme scheme. For example, I thought that entering the line ‘a pall-cloth on the Seven Days fell’, seemed to introduce a different theme than what he was developing. On the other hand, I did like Melville’s use of his refrain of McClellan in this poem. It seems he used different punctuation after it at different points in the poem to either say something about or to McClellan.

To my classmates

To my classmates:
THANK YOU for clearing the name of Emily Dickinson.
I had been growing increasingly frustrated as I heard multiple and varying conjectures about Emily's character and stability - based on our cumulative hearsay and what we could gather from the poems. I don't know that Ms Dickinson was not in love with her publisher, or her sister-in-law, or that she was not mentally ill, as many of us would like to suggest, but I am again comfortable in our knowing that this determination is not our place to make. Like an entire generation of people reading her poetry, our perception of Emily Dickinson is tempered with the manipulation of her audience that struggles to label and sort the poor woman so that her distinctiveness was something we could understand. If her poems did not fit into the transcendentalist format such as the environment of her time dictated, it's alright, it can be edited and titled - arguably, the same content, but a completely different flavor. If our brains can't wrap around the idea that some people are maybe in love with no one at all, maybe it is easier just to decide that something scandalous simmers below the surface, like lesbianism or insanity.
We too often take for granted the condition that the works we read in class were published in. It should have made plenty of sense that Arthur Gordon Pym was terribly organized, because Edgar Allan Poe was uncomfortable with the format and because he was terribly concerned with its literary quality, only with the story's marketability. There is a marked contrast between "Benito Cereno" and Herman Melville's selected battle pieces. BC is the interpretation of a true story by a talented individual - it's good because Melville is good at what he does, good enough to make money at it. It may be surprisingly to read the poems and find hey - these are really good - because this is the style and these are the pieces that Melville really cares about. Herman Melville struggled and failed to make a living as a poet, but ultimately considers himself this above all else.
It is very unfair of us to project meaning on published works of the long past, and we are increasingly aware of its inaccuracy. As her fascicles gain common ground, so does a more fair perception of Emily Dickinson. I urge my classmates to let Emily's supposed personal life Lie in Her Alabaster Chamber and to concentrate more on the life that she and our other authors wished to project.

Subject to change thoughts on Melville

When I read the Melville poems for the first time I was left thinking, "Okay, so what?" I'm not sure if it was because I read them aloud or if I was just close-minded at the time but I didn't find much there. I thought that Melville was just writing something straightforward and direct which is really different than the Dickinson poems that we've been reading. However, I read it again and then a third time and I found it interesting that I would get something more out of each reading. I realize that you can say almost all poetry is like that but I found something about Melville different. His poems almost tell a story until you look at each line really closely. Don't get me wrong. I'm definitely not ragging on Melville. I actually liked his poetry because it was easy to follow. "The Fall of Richmond..." is probably the best example of what I'm trying to say.
Anyway, I started to think about why Melville might write poems like this and my mind shifted back to "Benito Cereno" and all the discussion we had on Melville's stance on slavery. In his novel, Melville would always leave us guessing and present an idea with so many sides to it that it was difficult to separate his own feelings from the narrators and other characters. I thought he did this because he didn't really want people to know his opinion and I think that even more after reading his poetry. Perhaps his poems are tellings us stories so directly because that's really all that he wants to offer us. Maybe his poems are so straightforward because he doesn't want us to know how he feels about slavery or the war.
Those are just random guesses at what I got from reading Melville. I'm hoping that we can do as we did in "Benito Cereno" and try to figure out his opinions and feelings. It might help me tie Melville together better as an author because he still has me guessing.

Dickinson

t first, Emily Dickinson's poems were a little hard to follow. I felt like it was scattered pieces of thoughts, strung together.

After reading them several times, I liked them more and more. I still don't think I'll fully understand all that she put into the poem, but I can appreciate them for what I can understand. I especially like One Need Not Be a Chamber...

I feel like it was true what Nyssa pointed out in class that we quickly assign mental illness to poets when their material is dark or when their material is vague. I do believe Dickinson probably did have some depression issues...but I think that she was just completely vulnerable when she wrote...especially since most of her poems were written in letters for people and weren't necessarily intended for the world to see.

I like the third stanza when she talks about being afraid of confronting yourself alone. I think a lot of people have a fear of being completely and entirely alone, with nothing and no one around. But it's ironic because Dickinson chose this a solitude lifestyle for herself. Perhaps this lifestyle is what enable her to process and come up with this ideas in this poem. Maybe being alone showed her how it can be a scary thing to confront yourself, and maybe she was able to conquer that and become comfortably with herself so that she could write about it.

Melville and Dickinson

After reading Emily Dickinson’s poetry, the straight forward nature of Melville’s style seems harsh. Each of the two poets has a different way of describing aspects of the war. Emily Dickinson delivers her views of the Civil War through sublime messages and different rhetorical devices that leave the reader guessing at both their implications and the true topic she is discussing. Contrastingly, Melville provides his readers with more direct images and language clearly expressing various battles and events that took place. The differences in their styles could be attributed to their proximity and knowledge of the war, as well as what was acceptable for that time period. It may have been more acceptable for the males to integrate, more directly, the grotesque images of the war as well as their feelings about it.
Melville’s poem “The Portent” gives details of the hanging of John Brown for his participation in “John Brown’s raid on Harper’s Ferry.” The initial image focuses on the dead body hanging from a tree branch and the deformation that was done to it. The slow rhythm of the poem mirrors the swinging motion of Brown’s body. The progression into the second stanza takes a more macroscopic view as it hints to the uncertain future, mostly the future of the United States at this point in the war. Even the “shadow” in the first stanza could symbolically represent the darkness that is coming over the United States during this period. Melville is able to strategically combine strong images as well as historical references to give a warning to his readers and the country

what?

I have been trying and trying to figure out "Our journey had advanced" for so long. I have liked Dickinson, because, for some reason, I tend to identify with the "crazy" (don't get me started on crazy) literary figures in history. I like that she is succinct. I like that she holed herself away in a room by herself to think deeply about life. She did a really good job at being deep, so I'm glad she did it. Most of the time, I like that space between completely understanding a poem and not knowing what the heck is going on... most of the time. Here is an exception. Am I reading too much into this little poem? That last stanza just gets me!

"Retreat was out of hope, --
Behind, a sealed route,
Eternity's white flag before,
And God at every gate."

So they didn't go through the "forest of the dead"... they retreated, out of hope, but behind them was sealed. They couldn't go back, so they were faced to look forward at eternity's white flag of surrender. And God was at "every" gate. Part of me imagines some journey with multiple choices, but typically there's only one gate. What is the fork? Are there multiple choices once they get to the end where they're surrendering? I just can't seem to figure out what she's saying about death. Is she reaching an end, or does she have to pass through this forest to get to eternity on the other side-- an eternity that has multiple cities with multiple gates, all of which guarded by God.

I just don't know. But I sorta like not knowing with Dickinson!

Rhymes

What stuck me most in Melville’s poetry was his use of rhyme. I think rhyme is an incredible poetic tool and that when used, in certain cases, can be extremely effective if not ironic. In Melville’s poetry I found that at times this irony was really explicit such as in the “Victor of Antietam”. Melville describes this horrible battle but all through his poem there is this sing-song kind of rhyme which really contrasts with some of the images he is presenting. For example he says “the leadsmen quarreled in the bay;/ Quills thwarted swords; divided sway;/ The rebel flushed in his lusty May:” Melville really makes the war sound more terrible by having this rhyme scheme because he uses an almost childlike voice to describe this bloody battle.
Melville shows the horror of war by contrasting it with the playfulness of rhyme but also the rhyme seems to represent the positive attitude, and the naivety of the soldiers before going into war. He says in “The march into Virginia. Ending in the First Manassas” : “Expectancy, and glad surmise/ Of battles unknown mysteries. / All they feel is this: ‘tis glory,/ A rapture sharp but transitory” the rhyme seems to indicate the upbeat nature of the new soldiers, of the patriotism behind the war. However then by saying that this rapture is transitory, Melville uses the rhyme to point out that these positive feelings will be destroyed by the true horrors of war.

Recluse? Nah, man!

So, I'm the first to admit-- coming into the Emily Dickinson section, I had a sense of trepidation.

Scratch that- dread.

It's pretty obvious that Emily Dickinson has a reputation for being, let's just say, a little quirky. She's alternately described as reclusive, depressed, and morbid. If you recall our board full of Dickinson associations, it wasn't exactly endearing.

Suddenly, my mind has changed. I read "The Name of it is Autumn" and instantly saw past the labels and stereotypes and into a brilliant mind. Her diction somehow juxtaposes delicacy with gore, nature with the unnatural, hope with despair... Despite her ambiguous and possibly undeserved reputation, I'm relieved to be able to say that I deeply appreciate and even enjoy (gasp!) Emily. Especially because other English majors might get violent if I didn't.

Another revelation that occurred throughout our study of Emily was Ariel's comment about her reclusiveness. It's a very interesting and, in my opinion, valid assertion to point out that Dickinson is almost always labeled reclusive while her male counterparts are "outdoorsy" or "independent." Thoreau might have explicitly stated his ideas, but he still chose to withdraw from society in order to better know his mind and environment; why couldn't that have been Emily's goal as well?

Also, I think it's important to note that Dickinson was a pioneer of her era; female writers were few and far between, especially those that eventually rose to her level of success, and it's often difficult to remember that sexism ran rampant before feminism and suffragism took place. Maybe the reason we call her reclusive is because that was the label she attained back when women weren't supposed to be antisocial? Maybe our labels really are just antiquated stereotypes that have managed to stick over the years? I think it's really important to recognize these labels for what they are so that we can look at her work as its own separate and remarkable entity.

Melville by a Classics major

As a Classics major, the motif that struck me most throughout Melville’s poetry was his repeated discussion of classical events and people. Granted, some of these can be interpreted as just ancient Greek or Biblical; there are references to Babylon and Orion in “The Fall of Richmond.” However, some of Melville’s choices are not so obviously repeated in well-known literature. In “The March into Virginia,” Melville writes, “In Bacchic glee they file toward Fate,” describing soldiers heading for their deaths in the first battle of the Civil War. Melville’s metaphor is absolutely spot-on, as the peasants who partook in Bacchanalian rituals were all exiled if discovered; the government of ancient Rome wrote in formal documents that the Fates had decided this for the pagans.
An even more unusual reference to antiquity may be considered a stretch by some. In describing John Brown, Melville chose to title his poem “The Portent,” and end by describing Brown as a meteor. This is a particularly interesting combination, as Shakespeare described a rather famous “portentous meteor” in his history play Julius Caesar. If a coincidence, it is an odd coincidence. If intentional, it is genius on Melville’s part. Although John Brown and Julius Caesar don’t have much in common historically, both died noble deaths that served as catalysts for chaos.

A city in flags for a city in flames :)

I must say, I like Melville’s poems much better than his novel/story BC. I especially liked “The Fall of Richmond”. I think its a lot like reading a person’s thoughts when they are woken by the loud, triumphant crowd. At first, the person thinks, what is all this for? (“What means these peals from every tower, and crowds like seas that sway?”) Then, they realize that the crowds are celebrating victory of Richmond’s fall. (A city in flags for a city in flames, Richmond goes Babylon’s way--). This is significant because, from what I vaguely remember from US History, Richmond was the capital of the Confederacy and total surrender followed only a few days after it fell, and thus led to the end of the civil war.
The comparison to Babylon is a little odd to me, because I don’t remember hearing that Babylon was burned when Persia took over. This may be a bit of a stretch, but, maybe, the speaker is comparing Babylon to Richmond because both represented powerful “empires” and, in both cases , the city’s fall caused slaves to be set free—the Jewish captives were set free from Babylon and the African slaves were set free in the South.
And then lastly, “Sing and pray” prompts images of a person dancing and singing out of joy that the war is over.

The Fall in Richmond...

Melville’s, The March into VA, Ending in the First Manassas, stuck out to me the most. I thought that the poem was extremely straight forward and in a way shines a light on how ignorance and innocence can have a very detrimental result. I was really impressed by the speaker’s tone and they way in which he says exactly how he feels . For me, the poem represented the young soldiers who weren’t in the least ready for what was to come. They believed that it was going to be a joy ride and that victory would easily be theirs. However, as Melville writes here, these young men were soon defeated. My favorite section is the third section that describes the merriment of the soldiers, and how they were chatting and laughing, happy as they could be, when little to their knowledge, the “battle’s unknown mysteries” would soon reveal defeat. The speaker presents this poem in such a way that belittles the innocence of the young soldiers. In the third line, Melville refers to the trust and cheer in which he relates to being the results of both the young soldiers and their ignorance. I thought this was a fairly easy poem to decipher. I love how it is choppy and straight to the point.

A new appreciation for Dickinson

So I have to say that I was dreading the unit on poetry in this class…especially that of Emily Dickinson. I hated it in high school, mostly because I could never understand anything and I thought Dickinson was psycho. However, I have a new appreciation for her poetry and have enjoyed studying it these past two weeks. The discussions and group teachings we did on Tuesday was really effective and helped me to realize that there is way more to Dickinson poetry than a depressed and reclusive writer. In particular, I liked “One need not be a chamber,” because I and it seems, that the rest of the class could relate to the message so well. The fact that she was haunted by her internal fears more than those of the material world showed that she is like everyone else. We all have to deal with ourselves and whether we choose to admit that or not are frightened by it.
I also really liked connecting the Civil War into every poem of Dickinson’s that we read. Our group concentrated on “It was not death for I stood up,” and were able to find several civil war allusions within the poem. The way in which we went about analyzing the poems was like solving a riddle. Though the meaning is not always clear cut, one has to delve into the work to figure it out. Surprisingly enough, all the poems had meanings and references to what we as people deal with everyday. Although Emily Dickinson may have been reclusive, she was not insane and she delivers powerful meanings in her poetry.

Melville and Dickinson

I saw many connections between Dickinson’s “The Name of It Is “Autumn”” and Melville’s “The Victor of Antietam.” Both poems employ a lot of nature imagery. Melville speaks of a tempest and a storm-cloud while Dickinson speaks of a storm. On a straight forward level, both poets mention “a line.” Melville’s “winnowed grain from bran” can be related to Dickinson’s leaves falling off of trees. Both poems progress through action and the battle. Dickinson’s imagery produces a story of troops lining up, then soldiers being killed, and then ambulances carrying away the soldiers. Melville’s poem spoke of preparing for battle, through the battle, and then the aftermath. It can also be viewed as an eulogy for McClellan’s generalship.
The most obvious difference is that Melville actually names Antietam as his topic when one can only speculate that Dickinson was speaking of the single bloodiest day in American history. Also, Dickinson’s entire poem is a metaphor for the battle while Melville’s is more literal. Dickinson’s metaphorical poem is more gentle on a reader and does not force them to think specifically of war as Melville’s does. As, Melville’s poem seems to be a direct address to General McClellan while Dickinson is speaking to a much broader audience (pretty much anyone.)

Oh, and I also thought it was interesting that Melville stated “The one-armed lift the wine to you” since Stonewall Jackson lost an arm before he died.

Homework for Thursday

1) Read the Melville poems posted on Blackboard and bring them to class on Thursday: "The Portent," "The March into Virginia," "The Victor of Antietam," and "The Fall of Richmond." You can also read the entire volume from which these poems were taken, Battle-Pieces and Aspects of War, online.

2) Group B post on Dickinson's or Melville's poems by 9am Thursday.

3) Optional extra blog post on Henry Adams is due 3/17. This can be a make-up post if you've missed one, or if you've kept up with the posts you can do an extra one now so that you can miss one later in the semester.

Homework for Tuesday

1. Read "It was not Death, for I stood up" (22), "I like to see it lap the Miles" (27), "Our journey had advanced" (29), "One need not be a Chamber to be Haunted" (32)

2. Group B comment on blog posts by 11:59pm Friday night

3. Focus on one poem to teach to your classmates on Tuesday (group assignments below). Each group will have 10 minutes to present their poem (or part of a poem): 5 min. to walk the class through a literal reading of the poem, like we did with "The name -- of it -- is 'Autumn,'" and 5 min. to lead a discussion of the poem. I'll give you 10 minutes at the beginning of class on Tuesday to organize your presentations. As a group, you should come up with 2 discussion questions about your poem.

"It was not Death, for I stood up" (22) Stanzas 1-3
Isaac , Paige, Carly, Mattie, Ashlee

"It was not Death, for I stood up" (22) Stanzas 4-6
Ariel , Sarah, Julia, Emma T., Emily

"I like to see it lap the Miles" (27) All
Megan, Mark, Katherine, Adam, Alexis R.

"Our journey had advanced" (29) All
Martha Lee, Alexis G., Rebekah, Elizabeth, Linnie

"One need not be a Chamber to be Haunted" (32) Stanzas 1-3
Leah, Jeff, Austin, Emma R., Porshia

"One need not be a Chamber to be Haunted" (32) Stanzas 4-5
Nyssa, Lauren, Otha, Jaclyn

Walking with Emily

My favorite poem was the 'name of it is 'autumn',' chiefly because of it's beautiful imagery. It is easy to see the influence of the death tolls of the Civil War in this poem -- I think both this poem and 'they dropped like flakes' really epitomize the violence and tragedy of this part of our nations (as you will learn today from the excellent presentation we have prepared for you).

Her style is so distinct. I love to watch her use dashes and compact almost incomprehensible depth into just a few words. Some of the poems flow and have compact rhyme (perhaps the result of the editing we saw in class on Tuesday, maybe); others are sporadic and you wonder if she actually thought that "things" and "obtain" really rhymed. Also, I'd love to know if Dickinson meant to cause a pause every time she used a dash. How would she have read her poems? Were they passionate or tranquil?

There's something really special about the cadence of Emily Dickinson's rhyme schemes. I've always really liked her poetry and recently, while I'm walking up from South Campus, I repeat her poems to myself. Sure, it makes me look like a loon but it eases the pain of 8 am classes.

"They dropped like flakes (step) they dropped like stars (step) like petals from a rose (step, step)..."

I'd like to thank dictionary.com for always being there for me...

Ok. I actually wasn't put off at all by the huge words but, literally, without a dictionary I would NOT have gotten through "Alabaster Chambers." Wowie. But, it was well worth the effort (which was, in general, not a lot at all...). I really, REALLY thought that "Safe in their Alabaster chambers" was absolutely beautiful. Although Dickinson writes about death which is actually a very sad subject, she does it is such a beautiful way, in my opinion. I dunno if I can say I have a favourite line but, I really htink that the line, "Diadems drop and Doges surrender, Soundless as dots on a disk of snow." is perferct. Perfect. The way she recalls those past figures and illustrates that they have become somewhat unnoticed now is absolutely beautiful. I know it's sad but it makes me smile because it's so well-worded.
I also really enjoyed the poem "The name - of it- is 'Autumn'-" I thought that was really perfect. Ok. I basically felt that way about them all. But, I think this one really does is well-done because, although it is graphic ("And Oh, the Shower of Stain - When Winds - upset the Basin - And spill the Scarlet Rain-" for instance. Picture that.) it still manages to be quite lovely because of her word choice, I think. I dunno. It just seems like even though she is comparing autumn to a bleeding thing, she keeps it eloquent with words like "Shower" and "sprinkles" and "bonnets" and "Rose". Maybe that's easy to do but I just think it shows how much time she did spend on it.
In the past, I was really not a fan of poetry... like at all. But, in my junior year (I think) I started to get into it and it was an Emily Dickinson poem we read. So that's cute. But, the point of that is, I think that Emily Dickinson really captures poetry in what it should be: Beautiful and expressive... and that turned me on to the rest of it!

Death is only the beginning!!!!!

The recurring theme of death throughout the poems that Emily Dickinson wrote is astonishing to think about. Given the time period that she lived in (with high mortality rates) and the fact that she had so many people that she loved and cared for to die, I am able to see why it was an important part of her life. Even when she writes her poetry about the civil war, she fixates herself on the violent and deadly aspects of the war (how can you blame her).

The imagery that she uses in her poems makes you picture things in a totally different way. In “Safe in their alabaster chambers” she writes in the third stanza, “Grand go the years in the crescent above them.” I can just picture time passing by slowly as day turns to night and night to day. It is horrible to think about. In “The Battlefield” poem she says “They dropped like flakes, they dropped like stars, like petals from a rose.” You can just see men dying left and right just as quickly as a flower loses its petals. You think about this and realized that this happened in this country and she had first hand accounts living during this time. It is heartbreaking to think about, but intriguing to see it from her eyes.

Death is only the beginning!!!!!

The recurring theme of death throughout the poems that Emily Dickinson wrote is astonishing to think about. Given the time period that she lived in (with high mortality rates) and the fact that she had so many people that she loved and cared for to die, I am able to see why it was an important part of her life. Even when she writes her poetry about the civil war, she fixates herself on the violent and deadly aspects of the war (how can you blame her).

The imagery that she uses in her poems makes you picture things in a totally different way. In “Safe in their alabaster chambers” she writes in the third stanza, “Grand go the years in the crescent above them.” I can just picture time passing by slowly as day turns to night and night to day. It is horrible to think about. In “The Battlefield” poem she says “They dropped like flakes, they dropped like stars, like petals from a rose.” You can just see men dying left and right just as quickly as a flower loses its petals. You think about this and realized that this happened in this country and she had first hand accounts living during this time. It is heartbreaking to think about, but intriguing to see it from her eyes.

Short & Dense. Dense & Depressed. read me

After initial readings of Dickinson's poems, I cannot help but feel somber and gloomy. This feeling can easily be attributed to the melancholy tones, death centered themes, and the repetitiveness of these two facets of Dickinson's work. I also couldn't help but feel a bit frustrated after my first reading. Sentiments of "you read it too fast" or "why didn't you get anything out of it? (besides a feeling of utter bewilderment)" swept over me a couple times. Yet, I realized that if I slowed down, and actually took the time to figure out what Emily (yes, we're on a first name basis ;-) meant by an "Alabaster Chamber" or other obscure jargon, I could actually begin to piece together meanings of the poem and appreciate them greatly; though, I have to say my jovial personality isn't really a fan of being brought down by three depressing stanzas. I begun to see that though short, the poems contained an immense amount of meanings to be taken and analyzed. One thing that I began to especially appreciate, after I had stopped superficially just seeing depression & death in the poems, was Emily's creativeness in description. Though odd and uncommon, her comparisons and descriptions are truly original. How often will you hear autumn described as having "a hue of blood". Though it may be the gloomier side, Dickinson's view of things in a completely different light should be appreciated. But come on Emily, give us a smile for once : ).

Also, I did really appreciate learning that all poets aren't Super Heroes, creating ingenious works with every stroke of their pen, but that they too go through vigorous correspondence with editors. Makes me feel human. So thanks for that, Sue.

Ambiguity! Dickinson! Alabaster Chambers!

Pay No Attention to the Woman Behind the Curtain

First things first...GO TARHEELS!! I won't have a voice in class tomorrow but it was worth telling McAuley how bad he was. Secondly, I am impressed, amazed, and confused by Dickinson's excellent use of imagery in her poetry all at the same time. I think it's interesting trying to decipher what she means in her poetry, and figuring out what each metaphor is supposed to be. It's astounding how Dickinson can describe complex things and turn them into beautiful, seemingly normal ones. For example, the first time I read Dickinson's poem about Autumn, it seemed to me that she was describing leaves blowing in the wind, and she does it in a way that I could never even thought of. In Dickinson's poem she writes, It sprinkles Bonnets – far below –It gathers ruddy Pools – Then – eddies like a Rose – away –Upon Vermilion Wheels –. In my mind I have this image of all these red leaves collecting into piles, then all of a sudden a breeze comes by and lifts them into the air, rolling them away. The last two lines are probably my favorite of the poem because I would never have thought of a pile of red leaves blowing in a circle looking like the inside of a rose. The imagery she creates, this comparison between the circular nature of a rose's petals and a swirling bundle of scarlet leaves is amazing. At a second glance though, the whole poem is simply a metaphor for something else. The underlying meaning of the poem that relates it to the civil war is incredible. I tend to take things for their face value, and I wonder how much of Dickinson's poetry was what it seemed to be and how much of it is what readers have speculated it to be over the years.


Another thing I wanted to comment on was Dickinson's correspondence with Sue about her poem "In their Alabaster Chambers." I think it's very interesting what a profound change I have in my view of Dickinson by seeing the dialogue that took place between her and Sue. In some ways, I feel that I look at her less as this highly skilled yet depressed, brooding poet and more as a regular person with exceptional talent. I was also wondering whether it is positive thing that we, as the reader, are able to see some of the processes behind Dickinson's writing. Is it a good thing to see the method behind the madness? Does it detract from a very unique and rare product when you see how it's made? It's like watching how the special effects of a movie are done, and does it add or detract from the film? Does Dickinson's dialogue between herself and Sue add or detract from her work?

ah, She is very intriguing..

The first time I read alabaster chambers, I didn't realize that the first stanza is
referring to burial sites. My initial reaction was that everything seems happy but
something bad has occurred, making the surrounding feeling ironic to the event that had
occurred. After rereading the poem and looking up alabaster, I was struck by the
representation of time and death in this poem. I felt Dickinson was saying that death is
insignificant in the long run. After looking her up online, I found that the strict
Puritan belief that only a select few die and go to heaven led her to ponder the true
meaning of death. While I have read Dickinson's poems before and fond them to be morbid,
I was pleasantly surprised that this one seemed simply reflective. I also appreciated
how the poem is jam packed full of visual imagery and personification. My favorite line
of the poem demonstrates this: "Light laughs the breeze in her castle of sunshine".

Out of the assigned readings for Thursday, the Autumn poem had the greatest visual effect on me. I felt that this poem had horrific visual imagery, but was ironic at the end because she mentioned a beautiful rose and a bonnet. The contrasting images of bloodshed and pretty items made me think of how people not directly in the war were still affected by it. In a poem about a country filled with bloodshed, she used parts of the body (parts of the heart too) to describe the flow of the blood. Here I thought Dickinson could also be referring to bodies lying around.
While "They Dropped like Flakes" was a less harsh poem about the Civil War, the stark irony of using images usually associated with positive connotations caught my attention again. This time, she uses a rose, snow flakes, and stars. I don't know if this is reading too far into it but I pictured stars on a soldier's uniform and the bright red obviously made me think of blood. I haven't read a ton of Dickinson's poems, and so I'd be interested in finding out whether she uses pretty images to show contrast on a continual basis in her poems.
On another note, her use of capitalization makes nouns important...I wonder why she liked to capitalize these on top of proper nouns? Was this a style of the time, or was it only her style?

six feet under

After my first read of "Safe in their Alabaster Chambers" I was thoroughly confused as to what in the world Dickinson was writing about. What are "alabaster chambers?" Who are these "members of the resurrection?" What do "dots on a disk of snow" have to do with anything? Eventually I was able to discern plausible explanations for the many enigmatic phrases used by Dickinson. After a bit of research, I interpreted an alabaster chamber to be a coffin, which makes more sense when thought about in context with a "rafter of satin and roof of stone." Most coffins are lined in a satin material and the roof of stone is referring to a tombstone marking the grave. The second line also gives a clue that the subject she is talking about is a buried person because they would be underground (6 feet under, in fact) and completely sheltered from outside elements. Reference to the "meek members of the resurrection" is undeniably a Biblical allusion (I think it's in Psalms?) that alludes to God's promise that the meek shall inherit the earth.

The second stanza basically just reiterates that nature is continuous and is not really affected by death. I think it serves as an interesting juxtaposition to the other two stanzas though. The first stanza gave me a cold and numb feeling, whereas the second stanza is full of light and spirited imagery. Just thinking about an image of a "castle of sunshine" makes me feel warm and tingly, not in the least concerned with death, which I think was Dickinson's goal. The third stanza returns to bleak representations of a world separate from those entombed in "alabaster chambers." I believe Dickinson uses "diadem" as a term for a crown, which can be interpreted as the fall of kingdom/monarchy, perhaps? Obviously, she also knew her Italian history-- I did not know what a "Doge" was, but thankfully Wikipedia did-- and she uses the surrender of Doges to represent another change in political power. These allusions are just pointing out the surrounding world persists and never ceases because death is inevitable and immutable. Finally, I read "soundless as dots on a disk of snow" as a metaphor for how relatively unimportant a single life or death is in the grand scheme of things. A dot on a disk of snow is a minute detail as one death is in the whole world.

I initially didn't like Dickinson, my mind is starting to change.

At first, when I saw we were going to read Dickinson, I remembered how sad her life was and how much I disliked her writing style. While I don't remember what I read by her in high school, I will say now that after reading these four poems, I actually enjoy her. I find it compelling to read her poems which are quite creative in describing events. And I think the reason why I felt as if she led a sad and lonely life was because she was writing so much about the Civil War and death. So, getting that out of the way, my favorite of the three poems we read for Thursday has to be “They dropped like flakes”.

Of all the ways to describe death, the image of soldiers dropping quickly like snowfall or as miserably as petals from a rose is inspiring to say the least. What makes this poem more forceful is its brevity. Within two stanzas I knew exactly what she felt and exactly what she was imagining; an empty field full of grass and dead bodies, brothers and cousins on opposites sides of a gruesome war. One of my favorite lines probably was “But God on his repealless list/Can summon every face.” This statement further implies that all of those soldiers, who were dying so quickly, in the bloodiest war up until that time, could not have been identified due to the multitude and magnitude of death in a single area. Rarely any other war had such destruction and death as the Civil War of which Dickinson was writing about.

Most likely, people she knew were involved in the war and the death and disappearance of people around her also inspired her to write this and other such war poems. Most of Dickinson’s poems are very short and I was surprised and unimpressed by “It feels a shame to be alive”. This is the type of poem I was hoping not to read. How sad and depressed one must feel to say she is “ashamed” to be alive. The other issue I had with it was the fact that it was so long; quite unlike the majority of her work. She is such a good, brief, direct poet; I found it odd that this poem had five stanzas. I was not only confused by the length, but also by the dashes and capitalization. The only present feelings of Dickinson I could infer was the fact that the soldiers were saviors, which again goes back to how I said before that immortality doesn’t seem to be a common theme of hers.

In most of her poems, the topic revolves around mortality; we all die, and the soldiers do so in such a horrific way. If anyone was to make the case for immortality as a theme, it would be the idea that soldiers in general were our saviors and thus immortal in a larger sense, but as she stated in “They dropped like flies”, only God remembers their faces.

Interpretations

Well, I'd love to say that I've understood all these poems after reading them three times and I ready to add some insightful commentary. I'd love to say that, but I can't. These poems are tough and I am grappling (like many of the rest of you I assume) with mere interpretation.
The 'Autumn' poem is particularly tough. Dickinson describes a scene that takes place after 'winds - upset the Basin - And spill the scarlet rain'. The scarlet rain, taken to be blood, is the main imagery in the poem. The blood flows everywhere, and is seemingly all encompassing until it flows away 'upon Vermilion Wheels'. I took Dickinson's 'winds' to be representative of the passions and conflicts of of men, in this case, the civil war. By stating that is is the winds that 'upset the basin' and bring the blood, Dickinson using natural imagery implies that this is a conflict that was inevitable. The later description of how the blood leaves so unceremoniously seems to indicate that to little attention is being paid to the actual lives that are being lost.
Poem 444 also seems to focus on the civil war and the price of human life. Dickinson uses imagery here to portray that we as a country are selling our soldiers lives for liberty. She accomplishes this through her repeated use of money imagery. She then tries to reconcile if the price we are paying is worth the cost.

Homework for Thursday

1. Read "They dropped like flakes" (p. 17)
2. Read the two poems posted on Blackboard: "The name of it is 'Autumn'" and "It feels a shame to be Alive"
3. Group A post on Dickinson (any of the poems we've read) by 9am Thursday

Safe

I'm going to be honest, when I read the first stanza of this poem, I thought it was talking about a pearl in an oyster shell. However, after reading the poem several times, I came to the conclusion that Emily was (possibly) talking about religious people or death. The first stanza seems to describe a church. The church, as an institution, not so much as a building, remains resolute and "untouched by" any changes occurring in the world outside it. The followers of the religion remain inside it as well. On the other hand, I also thought that the first stanza seemed to be describing those who are buried and under the earth. They are also unaffected by the weather and events in the world around them.

The second stanza seems to go along more with the theme of death rather than religion. The "castle of sunshine" is heaven. In heaven, all is light and pleasant. However, the birds, which seem to represent a choir in church, sing an ignorant cadence, perhaps a hymn, results in "sagacity," or wise-ness to be lost. What this might mean is that people sing about heaven as a light and wonderful thing, but they are singing in ignorance and without wisdom. She seems to challenge the Christian belief of an afterlife.

The third stanza seems to go back to fit my interpretation of either death or religious peoples. If it discusses death, it's saying that the world continues above those who are deceased, emperors come and go unknown to those at eternal rest. Also, she could be saying that those who are religious are oblivious to the political or social events of the world around them, these events are "soundless as dots on a disk of snow" and have no impact.

My interpretation could be completely off, but that is what I gained from this poem. I'd really like to hear any feedback about my thoughts!

Safe

I thought that the poems that were posted online, “It feels a shame to be alive” and “The name—of it—is ‘Autumn’”, were a little difficult to read at first because of all of the dashes Emily Dickinson includes. I found that the dashes caused me to read them with awkward pauses that inhibited any flow. Nonetheless, I like that they are included because it is closer to how Dickinson herself wrote them. I thought seeing the facsimiles online mad her poems come alive when they were seen in their original form.

I also really enjoyed reading “They dropped like flakes” probably because of the rhyming that I have always found appealing in poetry. Furthermore it comes across as far less gruesome than “The name—of it—is ‘Autumn’”, which has a lot of blood imagery and metaphors in it. Although it is clearly about death, this poem read a lot lighter to me than “It feels a shame to be alive”, which, partially due to it being twice as long, goes more in depth about the price of war. The lines, “In Pawn for Liberty” and “That lives—like Dollars—must be piled before we may obtain?” particularly stood out to me. The notion that soldiers can be used as mere pawns, nearly inconsequential in a larger game bothers me. Furthermore, the latter line brings up the question of whether or not the cost in lives is worth the outcome of war, which I think should be considered a lot more before starting any war. When lives are concerned I believe that very few ends can justify people as means. 

More details on Gertrude Stein Event

The Bulls Head is hosting a discussion of Stein's Autobiography of Alice B. Toklas on Wednesday 2/18 (tomorrow) from noon to 1. There will be free brownies!! This would be a great preview of our reading for the second half of the semester, and you'll get to hear why people love this book so much. I hope some of you can make it.

Upon vermilion wheels

I had to read "The name of it is Autumn" several times before coming to any real conclusion about it. It appears that Emily Dickinson was opposed to the Civil War due to its violent nature. She makes this clear with bloody imagery ("scarlet rain," the color "vermilion") and she seems to be calling the battle both an artery and a vein. This also makes me think of beating hearts. At the conclusion of the poem, I get the feeling that Dickinson resents how little the war affects some people. The second to last line, "Then eddies like a rose away," implies that after all the sacrifice and bloodshed, it simply gets washed away and forgotten. The poem's final line reads, "Upon vermilion wheels." I assume that this signifies the death of soldiers, since vermilion is a reddish color which makes us think of blood.
I was looking around on a few websites and found this one: http://muse.jhu.edu/journals/emily_dickinson_journal/v016/16.1barrett.html
which discusses Dickinson's connection to the Civil War. I definitely cannot claim this idea as my own, but I found it interesting that the article mentioned her use of the word Autumn may have been a direct reference to the battle of Antietam. This seems somewhat likely, but it still leaves me wondering why she would replace it with the word Autumn if she intended the poem to be about a particular battle. Perhaps she wanted to emphasize the seasons and how the war spans across them all. Either way, Dickinson obviously felt very strongly about the Civil War and I think her views are evident in "The name of it is Autumn."

Notes on Dickinson's publication history

Emily Dickinson: Dec. 10, 1830 to May 15, 1886

1775 poems altogether

Fascicles contained about 800 poems

10 poems and 1 short prose piece published in her lifetime; 7 poems in the Springfield Republican (including “Safe in their Alabaster Chambers”)

Thomas Wentworth Higginson: author and abolitionist. “Letter to a Young Contributor” in the Atlantic Monthly

Dickinson sent “Safe in their Alabaster Chambers” and 3 other poems along with a letter asking him “Are you too deeply occupied to say if my Verse is alive?”

Susan Dickinson: married Austin Dickinson, Emily and Lavinia’s older brother; lived next door to the Dickinson sisters, was a close friend of Emily’s. Susan read and responded to Dickinson’s poems.

Mabel Loomis Todd: ongoing affair with Austin Dickinson. Enlisted TW Higginson to help edit and publish Dickinson’s poems posthumously.

Todd & Higginson, eds.: Poems by Emily Dickinson (1890); Poems, Second Series (1891).

Todd, ed.: Poems, Third Series (1896).

Martha Dickinson Bianchi: Susan Dickinson’s daughter, Emily Dickinson’s niece.

Bianchi, ed.: The Single Hound: Poems of a Lifetime (1914); Further Poems of Emily Dickinson, Withheld from Publication by Her Sister Lavinia (1929).

Millicent Todd Bingham: Mabel Loomis Todd’s daughter.

Bingham, ed.: Bolts of Melody: New Poems of Emily Dickinson (1945).

Thomas H. Johnson, ed.: Poems of Emily Dickinson (1955).

R.W. Franklin, ed.: The Manuscript Books of Emily Dickinson (1981).

FYI: Bull's Head bookstore in students stores is having a Gertrude Stein event on Feb. 18th.

Homework for Tuesday

1. Read “Safe in their alabaster chambers" 3 times: meaning, figurative language, form.
2. Bring laptops!
3. Paper 1 due 2/24. I’ll have extra office hours next week and I’ll bring a sign up sheet on Tues. Come talk to me about your papers.
4. Group A comment on a "Benito Cereno" post by 11:59pm Friday night.
   

2nd Time Reading

I have to admit that I was a little doubtful of seeing the book differently by reading it a second time but I've found myself pleasantly surprised by the second reading. My opinions of characters and such haven't necessarily changed but they have been made more open and very two-sided. I can definitely see how two different people can read this book in two incredibly different contexts. Seeing them both, I'm actually having trouble deciding which approach I would like to take myself. It's also interesting how these "two sides" can be pro-slavery/anti-slavery or good/evil or babo/delano. There are so many ways to interpret this story, each one bringing something different to the reader. It's almost, as I read it, that Melville gave us a chance to create the book for ourselves and for that I admire him.

Melville gave us everything we need... in code.

I would like to shake the hand of the classmate who in class said, “well, the name of the book is ‘Two Slave Rebellions at Sea’, so I knew something was up the whole time.” This is an astute point, and on a second reading, a viable point. Herman Melville gives us everything we need to undo “The Knot” (pg 77). In fact, every crucial plot point is indicated through a specific action, and every event is heavily foreshadowed. With the benefit of hindsight, we now can unravel Melville’s code to elucidate the true state of the San Dominick, previously “wimpled by the low, creeping clouds” of our and Captain Delano’s presuppositions. A poignant consistency is Benito Cereno’s inclination to faint or be overwhelmed by a coughing spell or sudden, inexplicable loss of speech at every suggestion of details pertinent to the mutiny. Cereno “seemed at no pains to disguise” (57) his gloomy disdain, and it seems that he uses these fits strategically to hint to Delano of his situation. Babo scolds him like clockwork for letting appearances slip – see page 60 as he chides “master will soon be himself.”
The plot is saturated with double edged words, but also with very specific symbols. Had I known for the entire plot that jumping into Delano’s ship would have meant the San Dominick’s redemption, I might have thought a little more of the narrative of Delano’s connection with his own ship. It is easy to disregard text in this book as trivial, but (unlike Arthur Gordon Pym,) Herman Melville uses nothing in his novella without a purpose. On pages 77-79, Delano worries excessively about keeping his boat in sight. When it is present, he experiences a rationalizing sort of calm that gives him strength to at least watch the charade unfold. When his boat disappears from view behind the cliff, Delano experiences panic that ultimately leads him to get the heck out of there, and take Don Benito with him.
It may take a third reading to codify the patterns Herman Melville used to hint at the plot. I wish I had just figured it out the first time!

Final Thoughts

While the first reading of Benito Cereno was a struggle for me to just get the plot details correct, the second time around allowed me to focus more on Melville’s deliberate choices. It was evident that diction and language factored strongly into hidden and double meanings and my initial characterization of some of the characters were proven wrong. For example, when I first read the novel, I saw Delano’s character as naïve and inadvertently missing important information that was key to seeing what was actually occurring on the San Dominick. However, the second time around, Delano’s character seems annoying and ignorant. There are multiple signals, and even though some are taken in the context of double meanings, all of them complied together should have been enough to make him realize what was really happening. On page pg 95, Benito Cereno is saying his goodbye to Delano and states, “go, and God guard you better than me, my friend.” It is the small clues such as these that should make Delano realize there is more to the situation than he is actually picking up on. I also noticed that the shaving scene, which continued from the first reading, had more emotion and fear in it, especially for Benito, as he “shuddered” pg 86 when he saw the razor.
While I felt some parts of sympathy in the end for Cereno, I was still left with the feeling that he wasn’t completely trustworthy, as were none of the characters. Each of the characters was presented as being so multidimensional that it was hard to just apply one specific idea or characterization. For me, Cereno started out evoking sympathy during the second reading because it seemed as if he truly feared Babo and some of the others. End the end, I was more or less distrustful of his disposition and the way in which he wanted to present himself in the best light possible.

symbolism

I guess like everyone else, I wasn't paying attention to the story this time around. I could let go of figuring out what in the world was going on in favor of relishing in the little things. What I really noticed was how the action of the sea seemed to somewhat mirror the actions of those on the boat. On p. 53, at the first sighting of the boat, we see an immediate connection between the boat and its inhabitants: "Ere long it seemed hard to decide whether [the boat] meant to come in or no--what she wanted, or what she was about. The wind, which had breezed up a little during the night, was now extremely light and baffling, which the more increased the apparent uncertainty of her movements." When Delano is on the boat, they get swept into a current taking them offshore, while Delano is being swept into this new, foreign, and suspicious world. During all of their interactions, they are at a stale place out in the water. Then, as Delano starts to figure out what is going on, a breeze picks up, and everybody starts acting weirder and weirder up until the climax, when we finally see some action.

Certainly there are other things to notice, such as the what I can now see as obvious hints at what was actually going on, as well as nuances in characters that were lost the first time around. I just happened to pick up on the sea references, and I feel like it helped to support Melville's story at least a little bit. Now whether the surroundings were affecting the action or if it was the other way around, I'm not sure. I don't know if they are even a cause-and-effect relationship. I just like that there is more than meets the eye with this book.

Not without little opacity.....?

My main reaction to the end of this book: There are so many loose ends!Of course, I guess I should have known that Melville wouldn't tie everything up in a bow. He tends to conceal his true feelings under layers and layers of conflicting views.
One example of this is the concept of the slaves' morals and possible heroism. Throughout the book he compares the slaves to religious figures. This is seen on page 53, when the emerging ship is compared to "a white-washed monastery after a thunder storm", "a ship-load of monks", having "dark moving figures were dimly descried, as of Black Friers pacing the cloisters". Is Melville saying that the passengers of the ship are holy and righteous? Or is he comparing them to dark, secretive Spanish Catholics?
Also not black and white was the use of litotes. For example the word doubtless is assumed to mean true, but it can also literally mean "without doubt" but not necessarily fact. The first use of the word is on page 59: "The best account would doubtless be given by the captain". Then it is used later when Delano tells Cereno that he should keep his crew under control, and Cereno in reply states, "Doubtless, Doubtless, Senor." This is very vague. Is Cereno being sarcastic or is he being depressingly impassive? I just wish the narrator would state his purpose.

As I reread Benito Cereno, Melville's intense descriptions seemed less complicated than before. The odd scenarios that seemed somewhat suspicious at first, were so obvious the second go around. It deepened my dislike for Delano's character. He is extremely naive to what is going on and although he finds some things to be out of the ordinary he brushes them off. I started to feel more sympathy towards Cereno and noticed the numerous faint incidents and the times they occurred were quite critical to the text. Babo had complete control over him and it was sad to see how helpless Cereno is. I feel as though Melville represents the slaves on the ship as more animalistic than necessary. He gives a rather negative conitation on the view of the slaves. Instead of emphasizing the intelligence of Babo and his underlying schemes, Melville makes him appear brutal and violent without means. However, the second go around I was just as impressed with Melville's ability to capture a scene so realistically and so brillantly. He wrote in a style in which I have never read before, and the challenges he gives are worth it. I am glad we read the novella another time because it certainly helps to capture smaller details not noticed before. For instance, I didn't pick up on how suspicious the cook Fransesco was when he prepared a meal for Cereno and Delano. Overall I really enjoyed this text and wouldn't mind reading some of Melville's stuff again!

Nervous Nelly

In my second reading of Benito Cereno, what I found the most interesting was that Melville causes Delano to be calm and happy-go-lucky, when he is not near Benito Cereno and Babo. Thus the mere presence of the two makes Delano uneasy and paranoid.
For example on page 63, Benito and Babo have just returned back to Delano and immediately he feels “an apprehensive twitch.” Then again on 68, as Benito and Delano are speaking, Benito moves away from Delano for a second, just glancing away and Delano, who had been working himself into a frenzy of worries, suddenly finds that his fears have disappeared “in one throng, like a hoar frost.”
Another incident on page 70, just after Don Benito has questioned Delano about the men on his ship, shows that Delano becomes nervous and worried with “ some ugly misgivings” in the presence of Cereno and Babo, but once they moves away from Delano he begins to “laugh at his former forebodings; and laugh at the strange ship” (Melville, 71). There are multiple other incidents also where Delano flips from being nervous with, and just after he is with, Cereno to being his trustful, goodhearted self. I just found it interesting, especially due to our “Is Babo Evil” debate, that Delano always feels nervous around Benito (who is always accompanied by Babo) – raising the question of who is causing the uneasy feelings? Are they both evil? Is it their tension that is being picked up on? Or is it just a device by Melville to create apprehension in the reader. I suppose I just want to know what people think versus drawing conclusions. However, I feel that through these nervous feelings of Delano, we as the reader are sharply aware of the anxiety present in Benito and Babo’s relationship.

Cereno: both good and evil

After reading Benito Cereno for a second time, I became more aware of Melville’s use of double entendre. After the first reading I was very suspicious of Cereno and saw him as a co-conspirator in the mutiny. The constant reference to the young Spanish sailor coupled with Delano’s criticism of Cereno’s status of nobility made me think that Cereno and the slaves overthrew the elite members of the crew. On second reading, however, I was able to see Cereno in a different light. I saw many instances where Melville used double entendre as opportunities for Cereno to drop hints to Delano about the condition of the ship and the mutiny. Because the other Spanish sailors were killed and only Cereno’s testimony was included in the deposition, it’s difficult for me to take a clear stance on the character of Cereno. I think that Melville used devices like litotes and irony so that the characters could be seen in different ways. While I do not think he intended this book as an anti-slavery message, I think he uses slavery and this account of a true story as a vehicle for his opinions on good and evil. It seems that many of the characters, like the negresses, have both good and evil in them, and that depending on the perspective of the reader can be read in either light. I think Melville’s conclusion on good and evil is that, like beauty, it is almost in the eye of the beholder, hence his frequent reference to grey.

Cereno as a complex character

In rereading Benito Cereno, I have most noticed Melville’s use of certain words almost as motifs, and I have also found Cereno to be a more complex character. Melville constantly uses the words “gray” and “grayness” and illusions of fog. Although these could be interpreted as a furthering of the grim and melancholy scene being set, I believe it is a deliberate attempt at representing some aspect of Cereno and Delano’s lack of information. Delano, for example, has a “knot in head” throughout the entire book; he has no idea why he should fear the slaves or the boat upon which he visits. Cereno, on the other hand, seemed like an oblivious character to me in the first reading. However, upon closer inspection, I believe Cereno is just terrified of what he understands he does not understand. Cereno knows characters like Babo and Atufal have power; he describes Atufal as having been a king before becoming a slave. Surely Cereno is intelligent enough to know that one does not become a king by having weak willpower. Similarly, Cereno may keep Babo as a close companion in the spirit of “keep your friends close and your enemies closer.” Because he knows there is much he is not seeing, Cereno tries to keep an even closer watch on his sneaky slaves.

Second read, different portrayal

After reading Benito Cereno for the second time, I took note of Babo’s character. For me, it changed from the first to the second read. Moralistically, I think we are supposed to side with Babo in the end. That is how I felt after the first read. However, considering the point of view of the story, (Delano), readers are urged to see Babo as a villain. After completing the second read, I saw Babo as more of a villain. As a result of this, Delano is seen as the hero and Cereno as the victim.
Since my group is debating that Babo was portrayed as an evil character, I noticed examples that made this portrayal true. Babo’s evilness becomes especially evident in the deposition, when the scheme is revealed. On numerous occasions, Babo threatened the Spaniards with weapons and death. Though Babo did not directly commit any of the murders of the Spanish, he ordered all of them to take place. In comparison to Madison Washington, Babo’s motives seem to be out of pure hate, while Washington’s were to benefit all the slaves and inflict as little harm as possible to the white men. The deposition also notes that Babo “was the plotter from first to last; he ordered every murder, and was the helm and keel of the revolt.” Told by Benito Cereno, the deposition allows the readers to understand how Babo acted and why he was portrayed as an evil character.

Homework for Thursday

1. Finish rereading “BC”
2. Prepare for the debates
3. Group B post on “BC” by 9am Thursday

Babo the Slave and Leader Simultaneously

Benito Cereno was probably one of the more difficult readings I've done in a while. At first, I enjoyed the difficulty ( I mean, when you read a paragraph that's literally only one sentence but 10 lines, how can you not be proud of yourself for coming out with even a vague understanding of what Melville is getting at? Look at page 102- I don't think I've seen more semicolons in my life?). But later on, I found the difficulty more to be a nuisance than a challenge. But the book was still fairly interesting, especially comparing it to Douglass' piece; Melville's being an account of failure while Douglass' was an account of valiant success. I certainly enjoyed the Captain Hook (Cereno) and Smee (Babo) interaction and liked the ironic twist that Cereno was (instead of a leader) too scared out of his mind to say anything; and the funniest part is that he was a slave to what appeared to be his own slave. The ending does finally satisfy my craving for how this rebellion happened, though I have to admit I thought the climax and rebellion happened all way too fast, one second they are sailing along and the next Babo is leading a mutiny (though I understand that mutinies do happen in the blink of an eye, it's just for me the difficulty of the reading makes it harder to pick up when it does occur). The most satisfying part of the novel was finally was finally hearing Benito Say more than "Si, Senor" and actually have a dialogue expressing some kind of [extreme, because he was just "saved"] emotion. Also I really Babo, because the whole time he had almost a villainous secret leadership going; let's be honest everyone thought he was sketch from the start (though at the end of the book he is still entertaining).

Bravo "Benito Cereno"

Although I thoroughly enjoyed this story, I was a little relieved when it was finally over. As the actions of Cereno, Babo, and the others on board the Bachelor's Delight became increasingly more suspicious, I wanted to know more and more what was going on. Melville doesn't let the reader know the truth until the very end and then everything makes sense. Cereno's behavior was incredulous and even absurd at times, and when we finally find out he's been held hostage the whole time everything comes together. Great rising action and climax. I think reading the story the second time through will be amusing and will make much more sense. It reminds me of the movie Fight Club where the main character has a "friend" that he interacts with the whole movie and the friend turns out to be a creation of the main character. At the end the viewer has an epiphany about whats really going on, much like with Benito Cereno. If you go back and watch the movie again all the oddities all make sense.

One thing that I was thinking about during our discussion in class on Tuesday was how the slaves were depicted as the villains. It's only reasonable that the slaves would try to revolt. I think it would be interesting if the story was rewritten from the perspectives of the slaves. Let's say the narrator told the story from Babo's point of view, and only Babo and the other slaves thoughts were included in the dialogue. How easy would it be then to see Babo in a good light and the oppressive, enslaving Cereno in a good light? Would Delano be seen as a villain since he poses a threat to their noble plan rather than the innocent hero? It reminds me of watching old westerns when I was a kid. In one movie the Native Americans were seen as butchering savages, while in another they were noble people simply defending their land. I remember being confused about who to "root" for because I had seen movies from each perspective, and I knew that the white cowboys were in the wrong, even when threatening music would come on at the sight of a Native American. If we were to view Benito Cereno from a completely neutral point of view, with every character's intentions and thoughts considered, who's side would we be on?

I agree, great book!

I must say I agree with the majority of the post comments. “Benito Cereno” was quite an enjoyable read. Though it may have read a little slow at the beginning, the pace picked up and became easier to read as I continued to progress through the novella.
In regards to Leah’s post about Captain Delano, my opinion of him changed as I read. At first, I enjoyed his character and found him entertaining, like Leah did. However, in the second part of the story, I became frustrated with his naïve and ignorant behavior. It also bothered me that he was “placed upon a pedestal” as Alexis Rabin commented in class because he didn’t really deserve that title. After all, Delano just happened to stumble across the ship and would not have saved Cereno’s life had it not been for Cereno’s leap of faith.
Several people also posted on comparisons between “A Heroic Slave” and “Benito Cereno.” Elizabeth made a great point in class that Babo was a more real and believable character, while Madison Washington was the opposite. In reality, a slave would probably have acted much more like Babo than Washington. In that sense, I appreciate that aspect of “Benito Cereno” more than “A Heroic Slave.”

Melville's comments on slavery

Here is a link to the "Supplement" to Melville's volume of poetry, Battle-Pieces, which Julia so kindly read for us in class. If you want to draw on this essay for the debate on Melville's position on slavery, just remember that it was published in 1866, a decade after "Benito Cereno," so you'll need to account for that time lag (i.e., you'll have to make a case for retrospectively reading "Benito Cereno" through the lens of the later essay).

Homework for Thursday:
1) Reread "BC" p. 52-82; read the introduction p. 14-19
2) Group B comment on one of the blog posts by 11:59pm Friday
3) (Optional) Read extract from Amasa Delano's Narrative, p. 113-139.

Cereno...

I did enjoy the story of Benito Cereno, although I cannot say that I particularly enjoyed reading it. It was filled with complicated, confusing sentence structure and at many times did not make sense. After reading almost half of it once, I was forced to completely restart, as I figured out that I had no clue what was happening in the plot. It is easily understandable why we are going to read this story twice, as I am positive I missed a large number of details in this first reading. Also I do not like the style Melville used of somewhat summarizing large parts of the story in a confusing thought of Captain Delano.

Also something that added to my enjoyment was the including of the actual depositions at the end. This added more of a realistic air to it, as it explained the true intents of all people on board, particularly Babo. One thing I find hard to believe is the Captain Delano was not more suspicious and did not decide to leave the ship at an earlier state.

All negative points aside, this reading was more enjoyable, although obviously much more dense and complicated to read, than Frederick Douglass’s tale and by far a better story than Poe’s.

Posting is Awesome

I must say that getting a late start on the book and having to read the book at a much faster pace than everyone else put me at a disadvantage to finding out the plot twist at the end of the story. I must admit, for myself the dialog between Captain Delano and Don Benito was at some spots very confusing for me with the elaborate descriptions at times.

Looking back on the story, I realize that there were several points where there was significant foreshadowing to who were truly in control of the ship. The point where the slaves were looking at Captain Delano as so they wanted to murder him should have been a dead give away but I dismissed it as I continued reading. Another was the fact that Benito did not want to tell the story of how the ship got to St. Maria. It truly did not occur to me that the slaves were in control of the ship until Benito was thrown off.

This was a descent story that was cleverly crafted by Melville with great imagery and a great concept for presenting a story. I truly like the story and look forward to rereading it again.

Oh, there's an elephant in the room

I enjoyed the amount of details and yes, the long sentences, in Benito Cereno. Throughout the story, I constantly was aware that something was not quite right. Through the narrative voice and through Captain Delano’s scope, details of actions by Babo, Benito, and the slaves were repeated to a point exceeding clarity for me. I think a little foreshadowing is great, but Melville really wants to make sure you know every detail… Most of the story is him going back and forth in his head about his suspicions.
As I glance back through my journal notes, here are some things I wrote about the evidence before Melville’s elephant attacked Delano’s men (read the title of this blog).. “I noted the razor comparison Captain Delano makes when he says that for a split second it looks like Babo is the executioner, and Cereno is the one on the block. Also, why did the sailor have an “inward chuckle” when Captain Delano asked him if he wanted to get to the harbor? The black men are looking at him, something’s fishy. Cereno can’t get off the ship, HELLO FISHY!!” While the detailed accounts of his suspicions at each moment were sometimes overbearing, I feel the intensity of the repetition added to the story for the most part. The reader knows something is not right, but is still left at the edge of his or her seat in anticipation of when everything will fall apart.

Whiskerandos on the High Seas

Of all the books we’ve read so far, this has been my favorite. Melville’s command of language and imagery gives this novella both a feel of reality and an elevated heart rate. From the outset of the book, with both the religious metaphors and the foggy setting, to the final shock when the “follow your leader” meaning is explained, I was engrossed. I did have a hard time getting into Melville before last class, but this reading flew by.

There are so many great recurring images that Melville uses to show Delano’s peril. I particularly liked the South American imagery, from the Lima intriguante to the moldy hammock in the ship’s state room. The international feeling (with features from Africa and continental Europe) gave the book a depth to it, perhaps because of Melville’s skill with language. Had Poe tried to do this I am convinced Pym would have become not only salt-addled but also obnoxiously cosmopolitan. Instead Melville does it with tact, even choosing to make up a few words of his own: did anyone catch ‘whiskerando’ somewhere in the 70s pages? Although I’m not an erudite Spanish student, I’m fairly sure that’s new to the Peruvian dialect.

I liked that about Melville. He took what could have been a yet another morbid briny claustrophobic experience and turned it into a riveting, goosebump-inducing, and aesthetically-pleasing work of literary art with just a few 'lies' as Colbert puts it.

Follow your leader

I thought that "follow your leader" was an interesting recurring thought. The first time it is mentioned as Delano saw the ship and it was written on the front. It does not seem to hold any particular importance. As the story unravels, we learn that Aranda was the “leader” and owner of the slaves and the ship. However, the slaves then revolted, killed Aranda, and thus became the “leaders” of the ship. They put his body on the front of the ship and wrote “follow your leader” underneath. They figure that they will not come in contact with any other ships, but a complication arises when Delano enters their ship. As the leaders, they controlled the ship the entire book, but made it appear like Benito Cereno was in charge so Delano would not counter their control over the ship knowing that slaves were in charge. Specifically, it appeared that Babo catered to Benito Cereno’s every move and order. This was complete illusion and trickery since Babo was really in charge of the entire ship along with Atufal, who had appeared earlier in the novella in chains. Finally, the fact that Cereno kills himself at the conclusion of the novella shows that he followed his friend and leader, Aranda.
I think that this trickery of who is actually in charge was put in to create a story that was almost a riddle. There were several suspicious things that Melville included in the story that could have lead the reader to suspect that something fishy (no pun intended) was going on aboard the ship, but nothing too direct. For example, Babo always seemed to answer instead of Cereno, which was an indication that he might have not been in charge of the ship. Overall, I think that the illusions and switching of who was really in charge made for an interesting read and the “follow your leader” motif made continuity.

Great Book!

For the most part I really enjoyed "Benito Cereno". I feel as though I would have gotten frustrated with the book because it is a little slow moving in retrospect had I not already known that it was about a slave rebellion. Since the whole book is entitled "Two Slave Rebellions at Sea" we know, although it wasn't known when "Benito Cereno" was originally published, that a slave rebellion has to happen at some point. It was not long before one could infer that the slave rebellion had already happened.

 

While some seem to have found Captain Delano to be frustrating I found him quite entertaining. I particularly enjoyed the part when Delano thought that the ship was haunted; the line, “I to be murdered here at the ends of the earth, on board a haunted pirate-ship by a horrible Spaniard. Too nonsensical to think of!” (78), really made me laugh. I thought that Captain Delano was representative of how naïve New Englanders were at the time and still are now. Born and raised in Connecticut, I was very unaware of a lot of the problems that still exist today.

 

Furthermore, I really enjoyed how both “The Heroic Slave” and “Benito Cereno” were about slave rebellions on ships without narrating the rebellion as it happened. I thought both books provided a very unique perspective on the events and were creative in their delivery. I look forward to reading it again and catching things that I missed the first time around. 

Intense.

Ok. First and foremost I want to say that I seriously quite thoroughly enjoyed this story! I think all the characters within it are genius and I feel like the reader can really tell how much time Melville spent in writing this because it is so beautifully crafted. (That said, I actually have no idea how long he took to write it… but I would imagine that he worked pretty hard on it… hopefully.)

But, I figure my gushing about the novel doesn't really give one to respond to so I will blog about Melville's stance on slavery. (I hope I'm not repeating what anyone's already said.) If one is to determine whether or not Herman Melville was pro or anti-slavery just based on this work, I would say that while he is anti-slavery, he is most definitely a racist. Wow!

My case for him not being pro-slavery is well-supported (I think) by the quote on page 84:

"At home, he had often taken rare satisfaction in sitting in his door, watching some free man of color at his work or play… Captain Delano took to negroes, not philanthropically, but genially, just as other men to Newfoundland dogs."

Ok. I think the very last part of that quote probably proves his racism but I have a different quote for that. I don't think that one who enjoys watching a free black man do anything (at the time, obviously) could be considered pro-slavery. I heartily doubt that ANY slave-owner at the time would've enjoyed seeing a free black man.

But, to further prove his racism, I refer to the quote on page 88 in reference to the "mulatto" Francesco:

"For it were strange, indeed, and not very creditable to us white-skins, if a little of our blood mixed with the African's should, far from improving the latter's quality, have the sad effect of pouring vitriolic acid into black broth; improving the hue, perhaps, but not wholesomeness."

I think both of those quotes make the argument for themselves that Herman Melville, while against slavery, was more than likely at least a smidgeon racist.

I'm glad i don't have to be a spoiler!

Hey everyone! So, welcome to the end of the book! I can't tell you how relieved i am not to worry about ruining the ending for everyone. So, what did you think? I really enjoyed getting to read it for a second (soon to be third-- such joy!) time. I remember reading it last year and not fully wrapping my head around the characters. This time around i still find myself perplexed by some and newly impressed by others.

Delano's inability to see things for what they are is incredibly infuriating. He is kind of like a child in a way-- in that he's taking in all of the information of his surroundings but not knowing how to put them together in a way that makes sense. Or better yet, it's like having a jigsaw that has one piece left and Delano keeps trying to fit it in upside down. He even goes so far as to list everything he finds strange (on the bottom of page 79) about the ship...but manages to shrug it off. One has to really admire that sort of profound density.

I found myself enjoying Babo much more this time around. And, i'm not going to lie, a great deal of that has come from my increasing dislike for Delano... so much so that anyone not him has gone up like 20 points in my book. He (Babo) has a lot going for him. He clearly has far more agency than most other people in the book-- he is not bound by ignorance like Delano, nor is he frail like Benito Cereno. He is organized, manipulative, and cunning; and while at least one of those isn't necessarily an admirable thing, it allows him to have some level of autonomy... so good for Babo.

One of my favorite interactions between any persons on the ship is of that between Delano, the spanish sailor, and one of the slaves. The sailor hands Delano a sort of gordian knot that he's apparently just assembled for someone to untie (a fine reason to do anything). Delano doesn't know what to make of it so he just sort of turns it over in his hands for a few minutes. A slave then reaches over and throws it over the boat. The slave is able to very quickly, and decisively, able to solve the puzzle that delano is overwhelmed by... once again proving that delano suuuuuuucccccks.

Enigmatic

I thoroughly enjoyed reading "Benito Cereno" and found it to be an enthralling and suspenseful novella. The contrast between "The Heroic Slave" and "Benito Cereno" is obvious to the reader, but remains an interesting subject because the former portrays the plight of slaves sympathetically, and the latter reverses their role and characterizes them as bloodthirsty barbarians. "Benito Cereno" was full of contrasts, in fact, and one of the most apparent disparities often occurred within Amasa Delano's own train of thought. His thoughts constantly wavered between feeling secure and safe on the decks of the San Dominick to feeling overwhelmingly outnumbered and uneasy. For example,

"Poor fellow, thought Captain Delano, so nervous he can't even bear the sight of barber's blood... is it credible that I should have imagined he meant to spill all my blood, who can't endure the sight of one little drop of his own?" (86)

"Why decline the invitation to visit the sealer that evening?... What imported all those day-long enigmas and contradictions, except they were intended to mystify, preliminary to some stealthy blow?" (94)

I believe that this story was written to be purposefully enigmatic, especially regarding Melville's view of slavery (does he condone it? does he condemn it?) , and all of the dichotomy throughout the novella-- such as the antithesis of the colors black, white, and red and Delano's vacillating opinions of his own security-- add to the obscurity of the plot. This novel, like in Pym, also has numerous disparities between appearance and reality, for instance-- the ship looked like it was boarded by monks in the beginning rather than slaves, the skeleton of Don Alexandro on the bow was shrouded to look like it was just in disrepair, and Atufl was disguised as a prisoner when he was really an integral part of the mutiny.