Virginia Woolf (1882-1941)_Mrs. Dalloway in Bond Street

Virginia Woolf is not only the greatest woman writer of the twentieth century but she was also a friend of many great writers such as Elliot, Joyce and butler. Although coming form from a rich family she was not giving the opportunity to go to school, she explained this consequence in a lot of the writing; she also explained that education is the key transformer of women perception in society.
In Mrs. Dalloway, Woolf related the story of an old woman walking down the bond street to go buy herself some gloves. She described, the nature, the street, the people and even the queen that she encountered during her walk. While she is walking, Mrs. Dalloway Clarissa saw Hugh Whitbread who was taking a family member to the doctor. She asked him what was wrong with the person; Whitbread would not answer her clearly. That then brought memory to her very own brother who was too shy to talk to her because she was lady. “How then could women sit in parliament? How could they do thing with men?” (P2448) she wondered how is it possible for women to advance in society, have the same rank as men in parliament if it even impossible for brother and sister to talk like normal people, impossible for her friend Whitbread to tell her the truth about the disease. “To ride; to dance she had adore all that. Or going on long walks in the country, talking about books…Oh the things on had said! But one had conviction. Middle age is the devil. People like Jack’ll never know that, she thought…how did it go?” (P2449) Here just like William Blake in the Ecchoing Green, Woolf was telling us that the old lady was nostalgic of her young years when she saw them dancing. She stated that looking back who always miss what you thought was so bad before; she gave the example of the middle ages. This bring it back to a slogan that said ‘ you never know how good you had till you loose it.’ “For all the great things one must go to the past, she thought. From the contagion of the world’s slow stain…fear no more the heat o’ the sun…and now can never mourn, can never mourn, she repeated…the moderns had never written anything one wanted to read about death, she thought; and turned.” (P2450) This was just a repetition of the statement before: missing what we do not have anymore. Woolf also told us here that our past is very important, that we must understand it in order to succeed in our future. That also explained Clarissa urged to make the shop girl see the French gloves that were worn long time ago, how better they were…

T. S. Elliot (1888-1965) _The waste Land

Born in Saint Louis, Missouri, Elliot was form the most respected family in America and England. His family and himself achievements will be forever benefited to us all. I did not understand all his poems, but the few I understood were very very good and well thought. In The waste Land, he talked about regret, waste, the sadness of life, the struggle and the end of human beings. It is a deep poem, that when understood, put a lot of things in words that we all already think of and know of. It is amazing how he talked about natural stuff like rocks, water, mountains…like they had felling or regret…
A game of Chess here Elliot is relating one of his friend who is tired or sick, who had some regrets about how her life was going. “You know nothing? Do you remember nothing? …Those pearl that were his eyes…Are you alive or not? Is there nothing in your head?” (P2429) here I think Elliot friend was stressing over the turn her life took, trying to convince him to see her regrets, asking him if he forgot the facts that she was trying to tell him about. “It’s so elegant, so intelligent, what should I do now? What should I do? I shall rush out as I am, and walk the street with my hair down. What shall I do tomorrow? What shall we ever do?” (P2430) here the woman had another depression, it like she was supposed to do something but did not have the time to solve at the due date. She was asking herself a lot of questions, like she wasted her life and that time was running out on her; she was trying to satisfy a husband I think who was coming back from the army…Could Elliot be relating about Virginia Woolf?
“What the thunder said” this part of the waste land was very sad for me to read, especially since I just lost my father. Elliot wrote: “After the torchlight red on sweaty faces, after the frosty silence in the gardens, after the agony in stony places, the shouting and crying, prison and palace and reverberation, he who was living is now dead, we who were living is now dying, with little patience, here is no water but only rock, rock and no water and the sandy road.” (P2435) Here Elliot was telling us about the sadness of life because of the fact that we come to life for a trip; have the prettiest houses, gardens, struggle to survive, fight each other, cry and shout for right or wrong things but at the end we all going to dye. He was saying others are dead and some are dying with little patience. Remember all the fight of our ancestors did for us, the French Revolution, struggle in England, world war one and two…Elliot is urging us to do the right thing in order to have a good finality, in order not to waste our time in this land. We all must return the favor we were giving by our ancestors and parents…
I cannot say no more because I might go off base, but this is a deep, truthful poem that must be read and understood by all. Oh I forgot!!! It’s amazing how many languages Elliot spoke, he was an international…I am so glad I took this class…

Charlotte Bronte (1816-1855)_Letter to Emily Bronte

Alone with her sisters Anne and Emily Bronte, Charlotte was a governess, which was the very few position open to middle class women back then. For Bronte it was better to be “a housemaid or kitchen girl, rather than a baited, trampled, desolate, distracted governess.” (P1895). That said it all, being a governess include being disrespected by bad behave children and mad parents. Bronte told us that she worked hard in order to be a governess, that she lived in a beautiful home “the country, the house, and the grounds are, as I have said divine” (P1895) but was not able to enjoy it at all. “As for correcting them, I soon quickly found that was entirely out of question: they are to do as they like…I have tried that plan once. It succeeded so notably that I shall try it no more.” (P1895) Her bosses forbidden her to correct the children under any circumstances, it must also be understood that they were not easy children at all ( I read some of the episode that Anne Bronte had with those kind of kids...) They go to bed thinking about what they should do, to make their governess life miserable the next day. And to say that those children were well born that they were heiress with no good behavior is very sad when we think about what they will be in the future. Charlotte said that she like the Mr. Sidgwick better than Mrs. Sidgwick “it is seldom that he speaks to me, but when he does I always feel happier and more settle for some minutes after. He never ask me to wipe the children’s smutty noses or tie their shoes or fetch their pinafore or set them a chair” (P1896) I understand where Bronte is coming from after working so hard on the kids all the day long she has all the reason no to want any more order form her bosses. Especially if she knows it is her job and that those children should know already how to tie their shoes but just did not do it, in order to infuriate their governess and give her more hard time. Poor governess…Poor Bronte's siters...

Sarah Stickney Ellis (1799-1872)_The women of England

Sarah Stickney Ellis was a firm believer that women should accept their inferiority to men and devote themselves to the happiness and moral elevation of their brothers, sons and husbands. I must say that when I first scammed Ellis work, I had no interest of reading more because I was like ‘inferiority’ what? She had no idea what she was writing about…but then I had to read her closely to see where she is coming form. I would use the word ‘superiority’ instead…Okay; gentlemen do not be mad keep reading the blog I will explain down the line..:)
For Ellis, men are born selfish, proud and sometimes with a shaking integrity, she added, “he has stood corrected before the clear eye of woman, as it looked directly to the naked truth.” (P1893) The author was trying to tell us that men need women strength in order to succeed; before I came in this country, I always heard my parents or even my teachers at say that “behind any successful man hide a woman”, I kind of understood that before but now it is confirmed. This is where to me women ‘superiority’ come from, they have the natural power to balance or manage everyone life around them, however this is not 100% always true. (Again will clear that up later) Ellis was very proud of her country England which is a great thing we all should be proud of where we are coming from in order to succeed; this is one of the strength Americans have over a lot of nation ‘believe in who you are first and you will succeed.' Ellis wrote, “The women of England, possessing the grand privilege of being better instructed than those of any other country, in the minutiae of domestic comfort, have obtained a degree of importance in society far beyond what their unobtrusive virtues would appear to claim.” (P1893) I agree Ellis; there is no reason why not, because women went to special school in order to overcome this challenge and I also agree when you said, “the influence of women in counteracting the growing evils of society is about to be more needed than ever.” (P1893) I am not sure if Ellis was clear about women being as educated as men, but I think that women needed to balance education, work and caring for their family to deserve full credit. Further more Ellis said that women needed to have a brain in order to give advise to their brother and husbands, they needed that to have a decent conversation with either (she definitely was for women education).
I agreed with all the point that Ellis made; I must also say that men are also capable of achieving what women do if they want and if they had a good education (relative to the home education that their mothers gave them.) It is just natural for women to care for others than men but form my own experience I know it is possible. It could be the other way around sometimes when a woman is less worthy than man; it all goes back to the fact that human being outcome is not 100% accurate…

Frances Power Cobbe (1822-1904)_Life of Frances Power Cobbe As told by herself

This author gave us an inside scoop of the education of women which lacked of intellectual challenges because they did not believe that women’s mind was capable of serious effort. In “Life of France Power Cobbe As told by Herself” the author narrate her own life in school. She went to Brighton that was the most estimated of not even 100 schools of women. Brighton was a very expensive school and the benefit women got form it was minimal because they were only thought about how to attract gentlemen. Although profane people called this school a convent, it did not come close to being called one because there was a lot of noise going around. For instance four pianos could be heard at the same time in a small room where ladies were supposed to read and recite lessons in English, French, Germany and Italian to the governesses. Ladies of marriage age were punish like babies for having their long shoe string untied… “Those who escape the fell destiny of the corner were allowed, if they choose, to write to their parents, but our letters perforce committed at night to the schoolmistress to seal.” (P1889) Basically, while in school women were controlled to the highest level by the staff, word could not have gotten as to our bad the school was. “All the pupils were daughters of men of some standing, mostly country gentlemen, members of parliament, and offshoots of peerage.” (P1890) This confirmed what Carlyle said about rich people then not being happy; then it is only natural for them to make poor people suffered. Imagine what those ladies form big family that were treated so strictly could do to their governesses when they got out, they will seek vengeance specially if they did not have a strong character. “But all this fine material was deplorable wasted. Nobody dreamed that any of us could in later life be more or less ‘Ornament of Society.’ That a pupil in that school should ever become an artist, or authoress, would have been looked upon both Miss Runciman and Miss Roberts as a deplorable dereliction.” (P1890) The women that were head of the school did not think that the girls they educated could make anything big with their life except attract men. As the author said going to that school was a waste of time and an aggravation of women immorality then. Imagine that “At the bottom of the scale morals and religion, and the top were music and dancing; miserable poor music.” (P1890) Okay if moral and religion were believed not to be important or were thought last and less, how do expect that those women turn out good or treat someone else better. Women with moral like Cobbe had to start over after that school, because the education they got was worthless later in life.
Maybe I should be less harsh to the rich then, they really were suffering too, the whole system was bad; however I must say that all these people back then were heroes like Percy Bysshe Shelley and all these authors one way or another tried to tell us.

John Stuart Mill (1806-1873)_On Liberty

John Stuart Mill who advocated sexual equality, the right to divorce, and free speech became the era’s leading philosopher and political theorist and outspoken member of parliament. His father turned him into a very smart kid; who finish his education at fourteen with knowledges of a man of forty. This author proved the necessity of emancipation very early; he was arrested at the age of seventeen for distributing information about birth control. In On liberty, Mill wrote that all human beings are capable of rationalizing and that it is a benefit to all to tell the truth and learn form your mistake, take advises form other. “ He is capable of rectifying his mistakes, by discussion and experience. Not by experience alone. There must be discussion, to show how experience is to be interpreted…Very few facts are able to tell their own story, without comment to bring out their meaning.” (P1846) Here the author was trying to tell us that human being must communicate with each other, value each other opinion, bring proof to other in order to be convincing. “There are, it is alleged certain belief, so useful not to say indispensable to well being, that it is as much the duty of government to uphold those beliefs as to protect any other interest of the society. In a case of such necessity and so directly in the line of their duty…it is maintained warrant and even bind, governments to act on their own opinion confirmed by the general opinion of mankind.” (P1846) Mill held everyone accountable to tell the truth; however he pointed that sometimes government must hold the truth in order to protect the society. I think the point that Mill is trying to make is that there will be no injustice in society if everyone tell the truth and respect others’ opinion; the law will apply to all, Church would not be misleading their followers…

Thomas Babington Macaulay (1800-1859)_A Review of Southey’s Colloquies

Macaulay is one of the rare authors who saw the sacrifice of humans in the industrialization process as a positive thing. He was very optimist and believed that the improvement of society is natural. In ‘A review of Southey’s Colloquies’ Macaulay tried to convince the readers that all these hungers, struggle and fight will end and that society will be much more easier to live in. Considering all the injustice that was going on then I must say that reading Macaulay could have done some good to low and middle class people because of the encouragement he gave them. “We see the wealth of nations increasing, and all the art of life approaching nearer and nearer to perfection, in spite of the grossest corruption and the wildest profusion on the part of rulers.” (P1823) I agree that, the wealth of the nation is growing, but it must be understood that only a small part of the population benefit form it then; I must also say that Macaulay was seen into the future when he said that the art of life is approaching to perfection because it is heading that way, and a lot of improvement have been done by leaders since then. Even thought this author was writing for changes, for poor people, he still could be read by rich and was reaching to society as a whole. “We believe that, in spite of all the mis-government of the rulers, she has been almost richer and richer…but the tide is evidently coming in.” (P1823) When we read about all the injustice that was going on in England, society needed an author like Macaulay to get strength and look forward to the future. It is impossible to disagree with him as he laid the changes that will happen in the world in an accurate way; almost like a psychic :)
“Our rulers will best promote the improvement of the nation by strictly confining themselves to their own legitimate duties…by maintaining peace, by defending property, by diminishing the price of law, and by observing strict economy in every department of the State. Let the Government do this: the people will assuredly do the rest.” (P1824) Unlike the other authors, Macaulay did not just denounce the injustice; he also laid the steps to follow in order to improve. I believe he agreed there was injustice but he had faith that changes could happen; he begged the government to take the first steps and assure them that the people will follow those steps and be glad they did.
All those authors have different or sometimes the same style; regardless of the style: whether denouncing or giving step; they all had a positive impact on the direction the world has taken…

Thomas Carlyle (1795-1881)_The condition of England

I picked this author because he was very touching in relating past stories and because he had an immense influence on writers such as Ruskin, Dickens (that I liked reading). This author also impressed me because he never gave up when all his work was lost in a fire...
“England is full of wealth, of multifarious produce, supply for human want in every kind; yet England is dying inanition…with fifteen millions of workers, understood to be the strongest, the cunningest and the willingest our Earth ever had; these men are here; the work they have done, the fruit they have realized is here abundant.” (P1809) The author heart went out to the poor people in this passage, he gave them full credit for what they did; which they deserved. I agree with him when he said the fruit of what they realized is abundant because we are still benefiting from those fruits; we are where we are today because of their sweat. “In the eyes and brows of these men hung the gloomiest expression, not of anger, but grief and shame and manifold inarticulate distress and weariness; they returned my glance with a glance that seemed to say, ‘Do not look at us. We sit enchanted here, we know not why” (P1810) These poor were shamed by their situations, they themselves did not know why they were condemned to such injustice, why the rich treated them so badly without respect or consideration of them being human beings as they were. “A human mother and father had said to themselves, what shall we do to escape starvation? We are deep sunk here, in our dark cellar; and help is far.” (P1811) Over two hundred years later, having read about the difficulties they endured at that time, I am wondering myself what they did to somewhat escape this starvation. It is sad to say that hunger will probably always exits; although the world has came form a long way. “Are they better, beautifuler, stronger, braver? Are they even what they call happier? Do they look with satisfaction on more things and human faces in this God’s Earth? Not so” (P1811) Carlyle confirmed to us that even rich people were not happy then, even though they fought so hard to keep with continuing injustice, they knew it did not make them happy.
“Have we actually got enchanted, then; accursed by some God?” (P1812) I am assuming Carlyle believe in God and knew that the God we preach to could not let his children suffered so much; so he is wondering if it was another forced that was causing this injustice. If I was there then, I would wonder the same thing also…All the authors I read so far impressed me in the way they worded their poems to make the readers understand by letting them draw their own conclusions…

Henry Mayhew (1812-1887)_Watercress Girl

Like William Godwin, Henry Mayhew was one of those authors who wrote about their interviews with people; one thing that I like about those authors is that they did not only assume what was going thru people mind, they asked them and then related it.
In the Watercress Girl, Mayhew related his exchange with an eight years old working girl; who had lost all concept of being a child and had became a woman. “There was something cruelly pathetic in hearing this infant, so young that her future had scarcely formed themselves, talking of the bitterest struggles of life, with the calm earnestness of one who had endured them all” (P1838) I agree with the author it is pathetic for a eight years old to have this much experience in life as did this little girl (yes little girl is what we call an eight years old now a days). This girl had no way of playing as her age would require, she did not even know if parks existed, where they were or if they would let her go there just to look. “I go about the streets with water creases, crying, ‘four bunches for a penny, water creases’ I am just eight years old, that’s all and I’ve a big sister and a brother…On and off, I’ve been near a twelve month in the streets” (P1839) In order to survive and help her family this little girl sold water creases for pennies. “I used to go to school, but it’s such a long time ago; and mother took me away because the master whacked me…I didn’t like him at all…he hit me three times ever so hard, across the face with his cane, and made me go dancing down the stairs; and when mother saw the marks on my cheek she went to blow him up but she couldn’t see him…That’s why I left school” (P1839) This passage remind me about what Charles Dickens said about the rich being mad and nervous; because of the fact that the teacher abuse a child who was probably four or five at the time and then ran when the mother revolted and came to get him. It is pathetic that this teacher made a child that age dance in front of him in order to make him happy; we must also understand from this passage that poor had no way of going to school considering this situation. “ I don’t have dinner. Mother gives me two slices of bread and butter and a cup of tea for breakfast, and then I got till tea, and has the same. We has meat of a Sunday, and of course, I should like to have it everyday…I never has no sweet stuff; I never buy none, I don’t like it” (P1840) This girl was starved everyday by having only four slices of bread total a day; it made sense that the life expectancy in Manchester during the Industrialism was only twenty years of age for poor, poor were oppressed, starved and used to an inexplicable degree.
Having lived here in America for eight years,I had forgotten that this injustice could happen to even young people; however as I remember where I am coming from, Africa, I realized that it could exist and still exist back home. While reading the Industrialism, it seemed like none of the revolutions that happen in England, USA, France…had any impacts on changing this inequality between human beings; however, since changes did occur, I must say that those authors that I read so far had a lot of impacts on changes in the right direction...we are not there yet

Friedrich Engels (1820-1895)_The condition of the working class in England in 1844

Friedrich Engels a German author was amazed by the injustice that existed in Manchester when visiting there. Unlike Dickens, He gave a much more detailed and sad expose on the industrialism in Manchester (London). The book that Engels published in 1845 laid the groundwork for Engels’s collaboration with Karl Marx. The author described London as a beautiful city that had its ugliness hidden form the first look. Two and half million more people were concentrated there during working hours; those are the poor who had transformed London into the commercial capital of the world.
“It is only later that the traveler appreciates the human suffering which has made all this possible. He can only realize the price that has been paid for all this magnificence after he has tramped the pavement of the main streets on London for some days….It is only when he has visited the slums of this great city that it dawns upon him that the inhabitants of modern London have had to sacrifice so much that is best in human nature in order to create those wonders of civilization with which their city teems” (P1832) Dickens said that the first days visiting London it was impossible to realized the sacrifice that was made by poor to make this beauty possible. The people who did the greatest jobs were not allowed to live there; they sacrified everything that is best in them to make that happen; for example their health, their fate, their proud of being to make this happen and did not rejoice from it for a second. “The vast majority of Londoners have had to let so many of their faculties lie dormant, stunted and unused in order that a small, closely knit group of their fellow citizens could develop to the full the qualities with which nature has endowed them.” (P1832) Engels revolted the readers by telling them that the poor worked to death to produce those beautiful places but that they government or managers of those facilities left them unused in order to satisfy a small portion of the population (rich) to the full extend. “Are they not all human beings with the same innate characteristics and potentialities? Are they not all equally interested in the pursuit of happiness?” (P1832) Here Engels wondered why this much gap existed between rich, middle class and working class. Wondering how people born the same way with the same mentality, motivated with the same mean can pass each other without seen each other. “We know well enough that this isolation of the individual, this narrow minded egotism, is everywhere the fundamental principle of modern society. But nowhere is this selfish egotism so blatantly evident as in the frantic bustle of the great city.” (P1832) Engels told us that this self-interest is normal in modern city, meaning capitalist cities; but he recognized that it was too selfish and not fair. The middle class people were not better off from the working class; they all lived packed together with filthy and gutter-less houses. “Here live the poorest of the poor. Here the worst paid workers rub shoulders with thieves, rogues and prostitutes. Most of them have come from Ireland or are form Irish extraction.” (P1834)
I could not still help wondering: how could this commercial capital of the world, this richest country hold so many poor and sadness? The worst of all is that the poor were the smartest since, if I am not mistaking Irish are very smart people. What was happening in the world then and is still happening to some extents now days. Is injustice ever ended in the world? I guess not, it is a never-ending fight…

Charles Dickens (1812-1870))_ Hard Times: CokeTown

Charles Dickens is one of the industrialism’s authors; the period of industrialism was described by Eric Hobsbawm as “the most fundamental transformation of human life in the history of the world” (P1818). Cotton industry was the first wave of the Industrial Revolution; the wealth in Britain was not shared with any poor. Considering this pollution and suffering Dickens wrote about Manchester, which he called the CokeTown. “It was a town of red brick, or of brick that would have been red if the smoke and ashes had allowed it; but, as matters stood it was a town of unnatural red and black like the painted face of a savage.” Here Dickens was telling us about the change in color of the bricks houses due to the industrial pollution (caused by the machinery and tall chimneys). “It contained several large streets all very like one another, inhabited by people equally like one another…. all went in and out around the same hours, with the same pavement, to do the same work, and to whom every day was the same as yesterday and tomorrow” Dickens described the street of Manchester, a town inhabited by the people who worked there, who are the poor. They all did the same work, which was an everyday routine. “The jail might have been the infirmary, the infirmary might have been the jail, and the town hall might have either or both.” (P 1829) Here Dickens left this interpretation to readers, he let us imagine what a jail and infirmary looked like and asked us switch them; imagine an infirmary becoming a jail.... He told us that there were facts and facts about the industrialism everywhere eyes were laid. “…Who belonged to the eighteen denominations… the labouring people did not. It was very strange to walk through the streets on a Sunday morning, and note how few of them…driving the sick and nervous mad” (P1829) Dickens emphasized on the suffering of the working class, they worked far from where they lived; only few of them were seen on the streets on Sunday driving their boss to church because that day was not a working day. I believe he referred to the rich man as a nervous and mad person. I agree with the author because rich people must have been mean and mad to make other human being go through life that way; they were nervous because they must have been waiting to be taken over by the poor at any minute of the life because those rich people still knew of the excessive inequality. “In short it was only in the case, that these same people were bad lot altogether, gentlemen; that do what you would do for them they were never thankful for it, gentlemen that were restless…that never knew what they wanted; that live upon the best…yet were eternally dissatisfied and unmanageable.” (P1830) Dickens denounced the rich; he said they are all bad and unkind; all ungrateful and restless. No matter how hard the poor worked for them they were never satisfied, that made the poor worked to death without satisfying the bosses.

Felicia Hemans (1793-1835)

Felicia Hemans was born in 1793, the year of the execution of the king and queen of France; she was a child of prodigy under the devoted tutelage of her mother and publicized her first volume at fourteen. At nineteen with three volume produced already she married captain Alfred Hemans in 1812. By 1818 she produced three more volume and five sons; unfortunately the captain left her with no reason just before the birth of her last son. She then decided to move in with her mother, brothers and sisters in order to raise her children and survive by continuing to write. After the death of her mother in 1827 she was devastated and her health suffered as a result she died in 1835. I am writing about Felicia Hemans because she is a great write, a brave woman and I was very moved by "The wife of Asdrubal.”
In this poem, Felicia Hemans told us how the day of her death and her children was a triumph for her; after having suffered the consequence of being left by her father and husband she condemned her husband to death by taking her children lives and hers. She spoke “The mean things thou hast done to save thy life shall not avail thee; thou shall die this instant, at least in thy two children.” (P 1736) She is telling her husband that the mean things he had done in order to survive elsewhere without his family will not last or stay without consequences, that he too should dye that day with them (the death of the two children).
In this poem it is written “Her walls have sunk, and pyramids of fire. In lurid splendor from her domes aspire; Sway’d by the wind, they wave while glares the sky….” (P 1736) The narrator is describing Felicia Hemans as a woman who did not have any more walls, any more strength; that she was not holding back any more as the end of her life was beginning. “The flames are gathering round …Full on her features glares their meteor light, but a wild courage sits triumphant there, the stormy grandeur of a proud despair….” (P1737). Here we are given a picture of the temple where Felicia was, there were flames all over, and she was courageous and proud of what she was about to deliver. She knew that this was her only way out, the only way to reach her husband and make him pay for what he did. “Are those her infants, that with suppliant cry cling round her, shrinking as the flame draws night, clasp with their feeble hands her gorgeous vest… Is that a mother’s glance, where stern disdain, and passion awfully vindictive, reign?” (P1737) Here the narrator was wondering if those suppliant children were hers, Felicia face was hard as a rock, she was just seen the end means: vengeance against her husband. “Live traitor, live!” she cries (P1737) This is too sad of story, like the narrator said “O slave in spirit” (P1737) Felicia was mentally ill of her husband’s behavior, her mother was her only strength whose death was unbearable; she then had to show her husband how much she wanted to pay him back for what he did to her. “Think’st thou I love them not? Tis mine with these to suffer and to die. Behold their fate! The arms that cannot save have been their cradle, and shall be their grave” (P1738). Wow!!! Here Felicia was telling the husband and even the readers not think that she did not love her children; that she held their fate, that she rather them to dye that to suffer, that her arms could not save them any more even thought those arms were their cradle; but now those arms were about to become their grave. Felicia was a woman of a kind, she was a typical example of courage and despair, I had mixed emotions when I read this poem, I still cannot imagine or understand that she was able to do it; but I must say that I did not condemned her at all. The more I read the poem, the more I understood what message she was sending us all; if her mother was alive the outcome would have been different.

Percy Bysshe Shelley (1792-1822)

Percy Shelley was a young writer who was very talented; he was one of the most radical visionary of the romantics. His poetry carried revolutionary ideas through the century; along with William Blake, he was a celebrity in the youth culture of the 1960 (P1702). Born into a conservative aristocrat family; grandchild of a wealthy landowner and son of a member of the parliament, Shelley was a star to the radical press and an infamy to the conservative press. He later married Mary who was the daughter of his hero William Godwin.

In the Mask of Anarchy, Shelley wrote against the political system that existed in England, he opened his readers’ eyes and rebelled them against the anarchy. “As I lay asleep in Italy, there came a voice from the sea, and with great power it forth led me, to talk in the vision of poesy” (P1711). Here Shelley said that the sea encourage him to talk about the injustice going on in the form of poetry. Shelley denounced murders, fraud, the hypocrisy that existed in church, the masquerade played by bishop and lawyers and last the anarchy. He describe the king as a mean person who ride on a horse splashed with blood; meaning a lot of precious stuff on the horse which came form the sweat of the poor. The king of England had an attitude that said “I am God, and king and Law!” (P1712) “Thou are God, and Law, and King! We have waited, weak and lone… our purses are empty, our swords are cold” (P1713) I think here Shelley told the king (anarchy) that they nation has waited a long time, that they are tired, people are poor and weak, it is time for glory and gold; time for a change. “Men of England, heirs of glory’ heroes of unwritten story, nursing of one mother, hopes of her and one another, rise like lions after slumber, shake your chains to earth…ye are may, they are few.” (P171510 Here, Shelley motivated the people of England by calling them: the fruits of glory, he said that they will be stories written about them where they will be heroes if they fight for what is rightfully theirs. He called them to get up and fight like lions, that the people affected by the bad system are many and that the people doing the anarchy are few. I think Shelley was really convincing in this poem, that people who read it that time took his advice and took action; because England today is exactly what he wanted it to be: great nation with glorious children with heroic great grand parents.
“Tis to see your children weak, with their mother pine and peak, when the winter winds are bleak, they are dying whilst I speak.” (P1715) Anyone in the audience then who read this will be infuriated because it was so true. He said that their children were weak from hunger I believed, that they live in a cold house where they had no money to put windows or heat. He also finished by saying that their children were dying from poverty as he spoke. “ Tis to hunger for such diet, as the rich man in his riot, cast to the fat dogs that lie surfeiting beneath his eyes.” (P1715) he said, you are dying from hunger, not eating when you want; he referred to forced diet when the rich man dogs (not one dog but many) are full and fat. (He is basically telling them in the eyes of the rich those dogs are better than human beings)Shelley reminded me of reading Thomas Paine and specially Mary Woolstonecraft, because of the way that they based their arguments on facts and truth, to open people eyes. Those authors really had impacts on the radical changes that happened in the world: emancipation of people, balancing conservatism and democracy, respect of human beings as a whole. I think those authors are called romantics because they based their views on real events, talked about them in different ways in order to reach the audience, responses to each other views for example Paine, Woolstonecraft against Burke. It is like they are in love with the same subjects (nature, political system, social injustice)

Dorothy Wordsworth (1771-1855)

Dorothy Wordsworth was born in the Lake District of England where she spent eight years of her life with her family. After her mother died, her father sent away from her brothers to live with distant relatives; it is not until 1787 that she reunited with William then they decided to have a home together. After following Coleridge in Germany to learn the language they settled in Grasmere in 1799. Although Dorothy did not intend to be a writer she was very good at it; she made me understand her brother's poems, and his generosity. “ Her Grasmere journal is a fascinating chronicle of early nineteenth-century life in the Lake District: full of brilliant detailed descriptions of nature, account of domestic life and household labor.” (P1618) After reading her, I understood that William wrote about real life events, that he cared about the well being of society, that people should care about each. I actually went back and started reading him again but I still did not understand his poetry ( I just have an idea).

In Home Alone she explained how she was sad when her two brothers William and John (who lived with them) left for Yorkshire to visit Mary Hutchinson who became William Wordsworth’s wife. She described very beautifully the nature, a blind man walking with two sticks driving a beautiful bull and cow. She talked about a well-dressed woman who begged for a half penny that had never done it before; but is obligated because of the hard times. Another woman who came from Manchester came to beg in order to keep her three children and husband’s single grave to be taken away from her. She had a bill form the bank, but it was a cheat from the bank-I assume. I must say that the system back then was very unfair to the poor people, rich people cheated without pity. to say that people as many bodies in one grave is outragious and revolting; specially if poor people worked ten times more than rich but got poorer.

In A Beggar Woman From Cockermouth, Dorothy described the beautiful nature as her and William went to an excursion to meet Coleridge. There, they saw a woman with two little girls all starved and tired from the travel. The woman was 30 years old and had been left by her husband who pursued another woman. Dorothy was again moved by this woman story and gave her more money than asked for. I think that women were cheated by their husbands a lot back in those days, I wonder if William Godwin reach to people by saying that commitment was barbaric :) I can see that Dorothy related a lot on women, she wanted to make sure that readers undeerstood how women suffered more that men.

Dorothy Wordsworth, just like her brother had generosity for people who could not support themselves. She was a modest woman who did not even take credit for her great skills; for example on the letter she wrote to Lady Beaumont, she said that she did not deserved to be praised for her poems (An address to a child where she described the wind so well) that William published in his book. It is hard to believe that Dorothy was just writing in order to please her Brother, she is very creative; I must say that if she was doing it seriously she would have surpassed her brother.

William Wordsworth (1770-1850)

William Wordsworth was the son of the dominant owner of lands of their region. Unlike Blake, this author graduated form John’s College of Cambridge, He spent two years in France after the fall of the Bastille. Wordsworth had many losses in his life, however reunited with his sister Dorothy and married a childhood friend. He continued to write through out his life, later the next generation though he stopped being republican and became democrat. Wordsworth was a poet of nature, he provide a moral philosophy of life and consolation to readers. (P1521) Matthew Arnold scored him third only to Milton and Shakespeare in English poetry. This author was not easy to understand, Simon Lee was the only poem I really understood.

Simon Lee was a seventy years old man that was once tall but looked little because he was old. He had no family, no children to care for him beside his old wife. He was forced to work in his old age in his private property; his wife helped him whenever she was able. The old man still found happiness in hearing the chiming bounds. Simon Lee is the poorest of his community, he got no help from anyone, no one noticed him and cared; he had a land that is worthless since he cannot work on it; considering his health condition and his age. William Wordsworth called his readers to make a tale out of this situation and make their own conclusion. I think it is not normal for such nice an old man be working alone just to survive and that no one offer him help or cared. When Wordsworth saw the old man working on an old tree, he offered him help, Simon Lee was so surprise and happy that he cried. The expressions of the old man made Wordsworth thing that unkind men still exist, that people did not have any heart since help was precious to this old man. Then he started mourning about his own old ages since this unkindness of people would still exist then.

He was right!!!! It still exits...old people still find their way around by themselves, young people do not help or sometimes, the ones who want to help are affraid because they do not want to hurt the old people feeling....maybe? I get that feeeling sometimes....

William Blake (1757-1827)

William Blake was a very brilliant poet and sketcher, although he had no formal education he became an inspiration to many poets. Blake, compared two opposite themes: good and bad, innocence and experience. I found him difficult to read, however the few poems I was able to understand were very well thought and interesting.

In “All Religions Are One” Blake stated that knowledge came from experiences, that all men and things derived from the poetic Genius (which I assume is God). He pointed that although human beings cannot speak and write from the heart they must intend. For him since in the eyes of all religions men are equal, and come from one source, therefore all religion are identical. Assuming that Blake had knowledge of many religions, before making such an assumption I must say that I agree with his rationally.
“The Ecchoing Green” is a poem about young and old; how elder people sat under the tree, watching young people and remembering their own youth. Thinking about how beautiful it was being so young and happy. Here again I think, we all relate ourselves to a young person at some point.
“The Lamb” is about God kindness, giving life, feeding, clothing and rejoicing the little lamb. I think, Blake wrote that we are all born Little Lamb, that God loves us all and bless us all. Although I did not understand at first this poem, I found it very calming and fun to read. In the Tyger, Blake wrote about Satan and evil.
In the “Little Black Boy” Blake compare black and white. It is about a mother protection of his child in the southern wild (P1395). The child said he is black but his sole is white and that he is an English child. In this poem Blake wrote again that God gave us everything we need and loves us all, that the color of the skin is just cover by clouds but in the end we are all the same.
“The Sick Rose” is about a man who raped a woman; therefore, commit a crime by taking the woman virginity and destroying her life.

William Godwin (1756-1836)

I am writing my thoughts on this author because he is the husband of Mary Wollstonecraft (that I enjoyed reading) and because he raised an intriguing point about marriage. William Godwin “placed faith in the capacity of men to be guided by private judgment, arguing that rational men pursuing common good would cease to need government, law and religion.” (P1379) My understanding of this sentence is that rational men will always need government; law and religion, which I agree with since the government represents the people.

Just like Mary Wollstonecraft and Thomas Paine, Godwin believed that people are born equally and should treat each other with respect and equally. He believed that a man should do everything in his power for the production of general goods for the society as a whole; that he should only stop when he dies. I am not sure of where Godwin stand when it comes to French Revolution, he said that a man can only revolt when he is absolutely sure that the constitution is bad for the whole nation otherwise he become a madman. William Godwin believed the best way to change an individual’s opinion is by argument, writing and conversation. For me this will be only possible if like he said everyone does what they believe is right for the nation as a whole.

According to this author cohabitation and marriage are evil as it slows the independent progress of the mind; for him two human beings should not be obligated to live together for a long period of time, as they find themselves deceived. “Marriage is law, the worst of laws” said Godwin. For this author keeping a partner to yourself by prohibiting your neighbor to have him or her, makes you selfish and guilty of monopoly. He also said that when relationship are changed as we please, we then would not be able to know who the father of a child is; human will not be differentiated by who their father is, how wealthy he is. One measure of democracy will be the abolition of surname. I do not think the abolition of marriage will be ethical, or accepted by the religion…

Thomas Paine (1737-1809)

Thomas Paine a fervent supporter of the revolution in Britain and America was already famous for common sense, therefore when Edmund Burke published his ideas about the Revolution in France he directly responded back. The two authors wrote for different people, Burke was more focused on reaching the rich audience while Mr. Paine wrote for the poor and uneducated people, which made him sell a lot more books.

Thomas Paine believed that, it could not be any men or generation that controlled the life of their precedents. Contrary to Edmund Burke, this author thought that the idea of controlling the life of others beyond the grave is a tyranny and abuse. Mr. Paine had nothing against having a king over a nation if he was chosen by the people, but he could not accept the fact that a king could choose his successor. (P1373) Mr. Paine pointed that the author Burke was unaware of the reasons of the Revolution of France. He said: “It was not against Louis XVI, but against the despotic principles of the government, that the Nation revolted.” (P1374) Based on my reading on 18th century France, I agree with the writer when he said that there was an ongoing hereditary despotism that had to be stopped by the revolution. Paine emphasized the causes of the revolution: the declaration of the right of the man and the difference between persons and principles. (1376). Just like Mary Wollstonecraft, Paine urged Burke to stop letting his imagination play tricks on him, that he must tell the truth to his readers, that he is writing about history not a play.

Paine wrote that all men are born equal and remain equal, that only the gender differentiated man, that this declaration of human equality being born in the modern world is the oldest doctrine of all since it came from God. Mary Wollstonecraft and Paine both agreed that people should help and treat each other with respect, they also agreed that because of the impoverishment by taxes and the abuse, the Revolution and the construction of a new government were necessary. Paine conclude by saying: “What we now see in the world, form the Revolutions of America and France, are a renovation of the natural order of things, a system of principles as universal as truth and the existence of man, and combining moral with political happiness and national prosperity.” (P1379)
This is another statement that he had in common with Wollstonecraft, and for me living in the USA make me agree with them 100%. They saw the future ahead of time !!!!

The French Revolution_ Mary Wollstonecraft (1759-1797)

I must say that I was very impressed when reading about Mary Wollstonecratf thoughs of the French Revolution and Burke’s opinion. It is hard to believe that she was only 38 when she died after accomplishing all the work she did and the clear view (future) on the modern world. She disagreed with Burke’s arguments for the hereditary succession of the crown, the alliance of the church and government, the blindness following of the tradition.

Wollstonecraft started by sending rhetoric messages to Burke, which I found very amusing. She said that sensibility is the elevation of feeling over rationality, that when sensibility and compassion are applied the truth may never be uncover. She believed that liberty is a fair idea that had not been in place in the European government, that the having of property and self-interest had bridged the rights of men. She wrote that hereditary property and hereditary honors have had a bad influence on the European civilization. She raised some very good points about the rights of men, the penalties imposed for the life of men, death when the property of the rich was touched, she wondered if those laws are natural to love. (P1366) I agree with Wollstonecraft when she said that it is unethical and a return to barbarism to sell your child as slave, not to teach him to differentiate good from evil, that you must work hard to earn your bread. She denounced the fact that only the property of the rich is secure, that the poor man who lived by the sweat of his brow has no mercy from oppression, that murderers (rich) found refuge in church. For her it is unacceptable for a man to fight for his country's well being and not receive any liberty or property; that prostitution and marriage of convenience be legal. Wollstonecraft made sure to tell Burke that he was supposed to be more sympathetic to fair ladies, that littleness and weakness are not the very essence of beauty. (P1370)

Mary Wollstonecraft showed all the unfairness that was happening in Europe at that time, she said that there is only so much pain that human being can take before revolting. I agree with her when she said “ such misery demands more than tears” (P1373)-The revolution had to happen for changes to occur. She said that poor and rich could live close by while respecting and supporting each other, which is what is happening for the most part in the modern world that we live in right now.

Eng 264 The French Revolution_ Edmund Burke (1729-1797)

France before the revolution was a country of hierarch, aristocracy and monarchy; people were overwhelmed by the social inequalities and oppressions. Aristocrats taxed the lower class population higher and higher. A revolution happened to save the population from this unfairness, the declaration of human rights happened “Humans are born free and remain equal in right”. England being so close to France had a concerned government because of the way things were going: The killing of the king and his families, the invasion of countries in Europe by the emperor Napoleon of France (P 1347). Edmund Burke, a political writer published his horrors in the revolution in France, even though he supported the revolution in America, urged the emancipation of Irish trade, argued for better treatment and greater autonomy for the American colonies, sided for the abolition of the slave trade. (P1356)

Mr. Burke believes that the French revolution is the most chaotic, ridicule and absurd event that happened in the history of the world. For Burke, the freedom of the people of France, the declaration of the human right did not deserve to take place at the cost of the brutality that happened. Burke is a fervent supporter of government and tradition, he does not like changes. He thinks “ the succession of the crown has always been what it is now, an hereditary succession by law.” (P1358) I wish Burke could have been here now and see how unlivable those countries in Africa who followed his suggestions are. He is against competing and democratic movement “those who attempt to level, never equalize.” (P1358) He believed that wealth and power should stay in the family and it should be the same for governing. That people should do everything in their power to grow their industry and become wealthier without trespassing upon others. However, Mr. Burke, I believe that those aristocrats were tress passing upon the people of France, since they were taking what was not rightfully theirs (unexplainable taxes) from others in order to be richer. If Burke was here he will see today that rich people (Donald Trump, Robert Kiyosaki and others) in USA are educating lower and middle class people to be rich like them. Burke is astonished by the atrocity by which the ‘generous and great’ king, his wife and children were taken then killed; he questioned the celebration (thanksgiving) of this event and called it homicide. (P1359) I think that they king has killed and oppressed enough people to deserve what came to him. The people of France wanted to end this family who made them suffer so much. Also the execution of the king was supposed to serve as an example so when another king or president comes he will not dare act like that ever again; some countries in Africa should follow that lead I suggest.

In my opinion Burke was a confused writer, was full of emotion when writing about the French revolution. He said that when ancient opinions and rules of life are changed there is a big loss, that we will not have any base, (to some extent I agree with him there), he pointed that Europe depended for ages on the sprit of a gentleman and the spirit of the religion. Then he said, “We must presume that on the whole their operation was beneficial”(P1362): Is he saying that the revolution of France was beneficial?

Introduction Of Myself

Hello All,

My name is Kassia Barry. I am from Guinea, a small country in West Africa. My first language is French, I finished my ESL (Engilsh as a second language) classes in 2001 from Mercer University. I am a junior form the Douglas campus and my major is Business Administration.
I am married and I have two girls of 34 months and 18 months old. I love spending time with my family, reading and watching movies.
This is my first time taking an online class and I am looking forward to the challenge.

Kassia Barry