Luck or Heavenly Coincidence ?

         Frederick Douglass is an extraordinary man; no one can take that away from him. He essentially taught himself how to write and for the most part read. He became a free slave and wrote arguably one of the most compelling slavery-era narratives from the perspective of a slave. All of these very impressive things are largely derived from his personality traits that are largely perceived to be as that of a revolutionary figure (he transcended the brutal and inhumane paradigm of slavery by educating himself and being able to critically think and analyze things, something not many slaves back then were doing). These traits could be seen as resilience, work ethic, extreme desire, and mental toughness the list goes on. However, has anyone ever thought to consider that maybe Douglass’s rise wasn’t entirely the product of his own personal qualities, but that maybe it was that of good fortune and favorable coincidences guided by a higher power that helped Douglass become the man that he is so widely known to be today.

            In his story, the Narrative of the Life of Frederick Douglass, Douglass himself evens admits to something along the lines of this idea. He refers to scene where he leaves Colonel Llyod’s plantation to live in Baltimore as “the first plain manifestation of that kind providence which has ever since attended me, and marked my life with so many favors”(30).

When I took time to think about all the favorable occurrences and the small details that entailed them, I noticed a pattern of this holy guidance. First, he was the “first, last, and only choice” (30) of all of the slaves that were being chosen to go to Baltimore. Then the first nice white lady he ever met teaches him the A, B, Cs along with some simple words, granted it didn’t last for long, but it did give him that ‘inch’ which would turn out to be one of the catalysts for his determination to learn to read and write, and eventually learn to become a freeman. Stemming from his extreme fortune of moving to Baltimore, Douglass was able to interact with “the little white boys whom I met in the street” (36) which lead to the succession of learning to read. How convenient that there just happens to be boys who are willing to become “converted teachers” and set up the vital tool [reading] to lay the foundation down to that of becoming a freeman. Another favorable moment in Douglass’s life was the meeting with Sandy Jenkins. Sandy Jenkins was the person who handed him the ROOT, which stimulated his tipping point during that scene with the physical entanglement with Covey that demonstrated “how a slave was made a man” (52).

I guess the question that I have to come to after analyzing some of the more favorable coincidents in his life, is whether Douglass was chosen, or better termed, guided by a higher power to become the man that he is seen as today, or was it just because he was a lucky guy?

Slavery: Turning Slaves and Slaveowners alike into Beasts

In the book Narrative of the Life of Fredrick Douglass, an American Slave, the author Fredrick Douglass recounts his experiences as a man born into slavery and the ordeals he suffered before escaping. His aim was to expose the horrifying and brutal nature of slavery on both the salve and slave owner and how slavery reduced the slaves animals. Douglass also writes using a sort of reflective rhetoric, to add more significance and power to his writing. One such use of this reflective rhetoric is the quote “You have seen how a man was made a slave; you shall see how a slave was made a man” (Douglass 107). But I believe that this use of reflective rhetoric also serves another purpose in Douglass’ narrative. That this reflective rhetoric is used to give the reader an idea that slavery doesn't only turn the slaves into brute and animals, but it also affects the slaveowners in much the same way. 

We can see this explicitly when Douglass talks about his experience within a salve action. One of this first and very vivid descriptions is how we illustrates how the slaves were valued as livestock. “We were all ranked together at the valuation. Men and women, old and young, married and single, were ranked with horse, sheep, and swine… all holding the same rank in the scale of being” (Douglass 89-90). Yet only a few lines later he sees these same effects happening to the slaveowners. “I saw more clearly than ever the brutalizing effects of slavery upon both slave and slaveholder” (Douglass 90). So from these two passages alone we can see Douglass’ belief that the slaveowners are undergoing the same exact human degradation into beasts that slavery requires. 

However this alone doesn’t prove that Douglass is trying to convey the idea that the degradation of humans to animals happens for both slave and slaveowner. We need some other characterization of the slaveowners themselves to see this. When exploring into the literature I found rhetoric that was animalistic in nature for Mr. Thomas Hamilton, Mrs. Hugh, Master Andrew and Covey. Often when describing the punishment the slaveowners would deal out upon their slaves, there would be some use of “savage” or “brutal” like adjectives used. One such example describing Master Andrew can be seen on page 91. 

“Master Andrew—a man who, but a few days before, to give me a sample of his bloody disposition, took my little brother by the throat, threw him on the ground, and with the heel of his boot stamped upon his head till the blood gushed… committed this savage outrage upon my brother” (Douglass 91)

For any compassionate and decent human being, we would never expect them to be described as an animal. Yet Douglass intentional describes their action as such to convince the reader that these slaveowners are just as barbaric and brutish as any common animal. But Douglass doesn’t only describe their actions in this way, but also their personalities as well as their souls. When describing Mrs. Hughs transformation into a typical slaveowner her soul “became stone” and her once “lamblike disposition gave way to one of tiger-like fierceness” (Douglass 82). As such we can that once a white man becomes a slaveowner, their souls turn to stone, and they harbor a personality much like an animal. 

Douglass further illustrates this connection by stating that religious slaveowners are the worst. I have ever found them the meanest and basest, the most cruel and cowardly” (Douglass 117). In this case, basest is being used to refer to these men as something lower than human, like an animal. With all of these contextual references it is safe to assume that as Douglass describes the process in which he is forced to become a brute, he is also trying to show the reader that the slaveowners are brutes themselves. This would match Douglass’ use of reflective rhetoric as Douglass illustrates that if one ttys to force another to become a brute, they themselves must act as an brute as well.

The Courage & Faith of Douglass

             In the Narrative of the Life of Frederick Douglass, Douglass gives his readers a detailed and in depth insight into his times as a slave and his eventual escape from slavery. The most compelling passage to me was the section where Douglass is deliberating whether to return to his abusive slave owner, Mr. Covey or potentially stay hidden in the woods. As he contemplates potentially facing death at Mr. Covey’s or in the woods, he comes across a fellow slave and old acquaintance, Sandy Jenkins. Douglass states: “He told me, with great solemnity, I must go back to Covey… I must go with his into another part of the woods where there was a certain root, which if I would take some with me, carrying it always on my right side, would render it impossible for Mr. Covey, or any other white man to whip me” (Douglass 111). Prior to this encounter, Douglass becomes very angry with God, shouting at him, begging for answers as to why terrible things like the abuse of Mr. Covey happen. When Douglass runs into Sandy, I, as a reader, questioned what the root actually meant. I interpreted it as a symbol of Douglass regaining his faith, taking this journey with Sandy and facing his master with newfound strength.

            Douglass portrays great courage in this particular moment of his narrative. Earlier, he was questioning his faith and deciding whether to die or live and fight. I felt that Sandy was the figure that put him back on the right path of facing Mr. Covey and helped him regain his faith in God. The root that Sandy gives him symbolizes Douglass finding his strength and gaining the will to fight, and he does. When he returns to face Mr. Covey, Douglass explains: “Mr. Covey seemed now to think he had me, and could do what he pleased; but at this moment – from whence came the spirit I don’t know – I resolved to fight” (Douglass 112). I believe the “spirit” Douglass refers to may be the strength he gained from the root or the “pep talk” Sandy Jenkins gave him. This becomes a turning point in the narrative as Douglass begins to find a reason to fight back: gaining freedom and having faith in God.

            Douglass refers to religion, specifically Christianity, numerous times throughout his narration. He uses it to compel his readers to take his side and understand that using slavery, as an excuse for religion was wrong. Many slave owners believed that their actions could be justified because they were doing it in the name of Christianity. Douglass’ viewpoints must have been incredibly different and new to people reading his narrative during that time period. He does not explicitly say that all slave owners are bad, but he tells his readers what he knows and how he lived his life. Since religion is a part of his and many slaves lives, Douglass’ faith becomes a vital piece of his storytelling. Everyone, in some way or another, can relate to having faith in something; maybe not necessarily religious but a person or and idea. Douglass wants his readers to relate to his understandings and to comprehend his side of the story, using faith as his most commonly used topic.

Life of a Beast

            Throughout the first half of the Narrative of the Life of Frederick Douglass, Frederick Douglass enlightens readers to how slaves were seen as property rather than human beings, just as basic domesticated animals were also seen as property and not animals. Both slaves and animals were worked hard day and night, with no regard to how tired they would get. They were both fed by the all-powerful hand that was their masters’. Slaves were constantly being whipped, just as a lion, or beast would be tamed at a circus, however slaves would receive much harsher whippings. The idea of human rights back then was nearly non-existent. After reading this first half of the narrative, I have come to a conclusion that the life of a slave and the life an animal or better termed beast, is roughly one in the same.

            When one thinks of a beast, the first descriptions that come to mind are brute, extremely hard working, and simple-minded. When I think of a beast, I think of a giant wild boar in the forest. Wild boars used to be frequently hunted back in the day, and are still hunted to this day. This isn’t exactly a perfect parallel, but Douglass educated readers in his narrative of how it was literally socially acceptable in some areas to kill a slave, just as one would kill an animal. As a young child, Douglass bore witness to multiple murders of fellow slaves, saying “that killing a slave, or any colored person, in Talbot county, Maryland, is not treated as a crime, either by the courts or the community” (26). It was literally okay to kill a human being without having to worry about any repercussions. It seems that many people back then, mainly white people, had no remorse for the treatment of the basic value of human life, just as they would have no remorse for the treatment of a life of a pig or cow that was about to get slaughtered.

            Speaking of the life of pigs, Frederick Douglass gives a strong allusion to the feeding of the slave children and to that of pigs. The children at his slave estate were fed a boiled, coarse corn meal that was better known as “MUSH”. “It was put into a large wooden tray or trough, and set upon the ground. The children were then called, like so many pigs, and like many pigs they would come and devour the mush; some with oyster-shells, others with pieces of shingle, some with naked hands, and none with spoons. He that ate fastest got most; he that was strongest secured the best place; and few left the trough satisfied” (28). It’s almost like survival of the fittest and these young ones were learning early. The simile with the pigs was a perfect image for me to try imagining how these kids basically lived like animals. They were given virtually no clothes and barely ate enough to survive. Essentially the life of a slave was survival of the fittest, just as a beast naturally partakes in the survival of the fittest in the wild.

            The idea of survival of the fittest was never more so felt then when Frederick Douglass had to return to his old master’s estate to be valued and allocated to the recipients of his old master’s will. “We were all ranked together at the valuation…There were horses and men, cattle and women, pigs and children, all holding the same rank in the scale of being” (40). This is Douglass explicitly admitting that the value of an enslaved human is no greater than that of a domesticated animal. The fitter the being, in his case man or beast, in the eyes of the slave owners would be sent to a better master, whereas the ones that didn’t make the cut were not very fortunate in their newly found home. Thus, the life of the slave is no different to that of the life of an animal, or in other words, beast.

Significant Moment of Douglass's Life

            One of the significant moments of Douglass’s life I found was when he shared his childhood experience as essentially his turning point. Briefly speaking, Douglass is informed to go to Baltimore to live with Hugh Auld, who is Captain Anthony’s son‑in‑law’s brother. He shares his experience on this occasion, from which he happily prepares to leave Colonel Lloyd’s plantation and his transfer to Baltimore. This passage focuses on his importance of how everything changed and I especially find this is interesting that he explains how this is part of big transformation to his path and why he appreciates this consequence.

            Towards the end of the chapter, one of the important texts I found was “I have ever regarded it as the first plain manifestation of that kind providence which has ever since attended me, and marked my life with so many favors” (Douglass 75). I thought this was interesting that he believes to be a gift from divine providence and that leaving Lloyd's plantation was a profound opportunity for him. Furthermore, he also adds, “I regarded as the selection of myself as being somewhat remarkable. There were a number of slave children that might have been sent from the plantation to Baltimore. There were those younger, those older, and those of the same age. I was chosen from among them all, and was the first, last, and only choice” (Douglass 75). I also think this detail of the text highlights his significance as being selected to go Baltimore. This suggests myself that, among many slaves, he was the chosen one, and from that point on, he experienced independence that freed him away from chains of slavery. The point to get cross upon this event is that if he had never got the chance to leave Lloyd’s plantation, he might never have escaped from slavery; he may have remained as a slave in Maryland instead of writing his autobiography. At the end, I can essentially see that Douglass takes appreciation upon this consequence, and that he considers to be a turning point in his life.

Significance of Douglass’s Education and Pursuit of His Goal

            From reading Narrative of the Life of Frederick Douglass, I figured that there are significant roles that education plays, in terms of pursuing Douglass’s ultimate goal, or his freedom. As being a former slave, Douglass escaped from his Maryland slaveholder. Narrative reveals his strong courage on his journey from slave to free man. Upon his journey, Douglass mentioned his idea to pursue freedom by looking into knowledge and education, taking tenacious and ingenious efforts of learning how to read and write. He shows us that, to be a slave was not only to be in bondage physically but mentally, and to gain knowledge and education is the intellectual tool that takes him to become free. As a reader, I can essentially see some significant insights in his education formation in relation to his freedom.

            One of the key features in this story is definitely the education as the path of freedom, especially looking from his mental aspect that he sees himself intellectual. Throughout the story, I can see that gaining education can be something both appreciating and miserable. Douglass said, “In moments of agony, I envied my fellow-slaves for their stupidity. I have often wished myself a beast. I preferred the condition of the meanest reptile to my own. Any thing, no matter what, to get rid of thinking! It was this everlasting thinking of my condition that tormented me”(Douglass 84). This indicates that he is placed in different level upon gaining education than others; from that point on, he no longer referred to himself as ignorant. However, from his understanding upon the current situation, the true reality of slavery of his people was a great burden for him to handle. Douglass experiences a crisis since he realizes that, while education has set his mind free, he is still a slave, and that he wishes that he was uneducated again, because he believes his plight is worse off than an uneducated slave. As a reader, I can see that Douglass presented education as the primary means to free him, and as his intellectual tool to work for the freedom of all slaves, though it also served as his suffering from his mental perspective.

            As far as story goes, I think the idea that education sets the freedom is part of the biggest factor in this story. Though Douglass senses this notion, he suffers by such cruel reality that hits as slave himself. Rather than providing immediate freedom, this suffering serves him a doubt. As a reader, I think if slaves can articulate the injustice of their consequences through education, then it would help them to recognize themselves as men rather than slaves, and free them from slavery.

The Theme of The Birthmark

                  In the story of The Birthmark, many themes could be interpreted, and one of the concrete themes that I found is the foolishness to compete with nature to fix an imperfection. The story generally shows the significance in the idea of perfection, but in contrast, it also points out how confronting against unattainable ideology would turn out to be a foolish thing to do.

            As story depicts, Aylmer’s desire for fixing a small imperfection of Georgiana’s birthmark on left cheek leads to her death. His obsession of perfection is a failure, backfiring towards the worst outcome it could possibly occur. His foolish action in striving to get rid of imperfection, or birthmark portrays the idea that human imperfection cannot be separated out of our humanity. Following this idea, the important text reads, "The crimson hand expressed the ineludible gripe in which mortality clutches the highest and purest of earthly mould, degrading them into kindred with the lowest, and even with the very brutes, like whom their visible frames return to dust. In this manner, selecting it as the symbol of his wife's liability to sin, sorrow, decay, and death, …” (Hawthrone 86). This means that it is part of human nature to be imperfect. It is an impossible task to gain absolute perfection by human hand. Thus, perfection is something not attainable except in spiritual shape, which makes only God could create it by their hand.

            Knowing that humanity is comprised of imperfect and mortal, Aylmer is a part that strives for immortality and perfection. Essentially, his scientific approach to fix a small imperfection fails, turning out to kill Georgiana. As a reader, we can identify that Aylmer’s action is clearly part of his foolishness. His action is a reflection of dissatisfaction for Georgiana’s birthmark, though, his pursuit causes destruction; his discontent with Georgiana’s birthmark ruins the most perfect thing in his life.

Valuing Perfection over Life

One could argue that perfection is the essence of being human. Constantly and constantly we as humans are trying to achieve perfection. That is the ultimate goal in anything and everything we do. Not only do we want to achieve perfection ourselves, but we typically expect perfection from others. This can be seen in our grading system, for example. We are always graded against perfection, against a A+ or a 100%. Yet as the saying goes “we are only human”, and it is impossible to achieve perfection. The act of approaching perfection only increases the difficulty of reaching perfection or creates imperfection. This drive for perfection and its ultimate outcome is seen in Nathaniel Hawthorn’s The Birthmark. 

In this short story, the main character Aylmer is a man of science, who believes that science is more powerful than nature itself. Aylmer believes this because science, according to Aylmer, can fix and correct mistakes unlike nature. This is seen when Aylmer says “…what will be my triumph when I shall have corrected what Nature left imperfect in her fairest work!” (Hawthorne, 88). It through these fixing of mistakes that Aylmer tries to reach perfection. We not only see this in Aylmer’s need and desire to remove the birthmark on his wife’s face, but in the areas of science he explores, alchemy and a potion of immortality. Both of which would be ways to fix major “mistakes” of nature, the premature and untimely death of humans and all organisms, as well as the inability to shape fundamental elements into more desirable substances. Yet as Aylmer attempts to reach perfection and fix the mistakes brought on by nature, he instead creates only imperfection. This can be seen in the following passage. “He more than intimated that it was at his option to concoct a liquid that should prolong life for years, perhaps interminably; but that it would produce a discord in Nature which all the world, and chiefly the quaffer of the immortal nostrum, would find cause to curse” (Hawthorne, 91). The imperfection Aylmer is risking to create by attempting to reach perfection would “produce a discord in Nature” and throw the world into chaos. 

Aylmer is not only trying to create perfection, but his willing to throw everything away to achieve perfection. He is willing to risk his wife’s life to create pure beauty as well as throw the entire world into chaos. Its this reaching perfection but at a price that I believe is inherently apart of human nature. To risk everything to obtain something, anything. 

Perfection & Disfigurement

by Megan Renner

From our discussion of Hawthorne’s The Birthmark, the theme that we seemed to keep coming back to was the perception of beauty and what beauty really means to the individual. The birthmark seems to be defined as an imperfection in Aylmer’s eyes. Interestingly enough, other people such as Georgiana’s previous suitors viewed the birthmark as an addition to her beauty. When taking a closer look at the characters in this story, I perceived Aylmer as a perfectionist and someone who places science and discovery over anything else. His own self-interest seems to cloud his judgment when trying to perfect his wife’s face. Could Aylmer merely be trying to prove to himself that he can “fix” his wife’s face, seeing her as a subject that needs to be tested and experimented on? I think that he sees the “problem” with Georgiana as a challenge and wants to show that his power as a scientist is superior above everyone else.

            After Aylmer marries Georgiana, we as readers can infer that Aylmer feels like he has won himself a prize that other men have tried to pursue. I viewed Aylmer as a very manipulative character who took advantage of Georgiana’s innocence. When asked about getting the birthmark removed Georgiana replies: “Then why did you take me from my mother’s side? You cannot love what shocks you” (Hawthorne 85). As a reader, I sympathized with Georgiana. She just married this man with the intention that he loves her and wants to spend the rest of his life with her, but does is repulsed by a mark on her cheek. If Georgiana did not have the birthmark, would Aylmer finally accept her and view her as beautiful? Or would he merely find something else wrong with her appearance? Aylmer seems to place achieving perfection about everything else in his life.

            What’s intriguing about this short story is the boudoir that Aylmer has constructed specifically for Georgiana. Aylmer seems to find the boudoir a solution to Georgiana’s imperfection. He seems to believe that if he surrounds her with immense beauty, it will distract him from the birthmark. The boudoir is described as: “beautiful apartments not unfit to be the secluded abode of a lovely women” (90). Aylmer is so fixated on perfection that he creates these rooms for his wife that are so exquisite and beautiful in the hopes that it will distract him from the birthmark. While reading this earlier in the week, I was confused by Aylmer’s intentions: did he not notice the birthmark when he met Georgiana, before marrying her? I then realized that maybe because he was influenced by everyone else’s perception of his beauty he did not really notice it until after they were married.

            As the novel continues, Georgiana finds her husband’s works within his library. Each experiment is marked as a success or failure and Georgiana recognizes that “it was the sad confession and continual exemplification of the shortcomings of the composite man” (94). In comparison to the boudoir Aylmer’s scientific library lists all of his successes and failures, and perhaps the “ugliness” that comes with his work. Curiously enough, this makes Georgiana love and “worship” her husband even more due to his ambition and appreciation for science. This twisted relationship reveals than there is disfigurement and beauty in everything; beauty is truly in the eye of the beholder and in Aylmer’s case, beauty is not found in a hand-shaped birthmark.

            

Take a Step Back By Taku Shiozaki

           After reading and discussing Nathaniel Hawthorne’s short story, The Birthmark, I found a hidden nugget of truth, or life lesson in the irony of the story. In the story, a rational, ambitious, yet hubristic scientist tries to scientifically remove a small, crimson, handprint looking birthmark from his already drop dead gorgeous wife’s cheek. The ironic part is, when he finally accomplishes his goal of removing the birthmark his wife dies. It’s sad to think about, but the thing [his wife] he was working so hard to change, ended up being the victim of his own self-interest. The hidden nugget of truth I found from this story was to step back, let go of all self-preconceived notions, and truly understand, as well a accept people for who they really are.

I feel like too many people these days are trying to mold their significant others, friends, and family into something that they are not, which in the end causes more damage than good. I’ve personally been the offender and the victim of this, and usually the root of the problem comes from not being able to step back from my own self-interests and try to understand things from other peoples’ perspectives. I’ll also admit that I have thought that I am always right at times, and fail to try to actually listen to what other people are trying to tell me, but I also feel like that’s not just me. It’s almost a problem of pure self-misinterpretation, in the sense that we are so caught up in our own assumptions of things that we fail to stop and listen to the interpretations of those around us. I believe that in society, it is the idea of class roles that are setting people up to follow in the same footsteps as this scientist.

And yes, there are certain situations in which people actually do have to make changes in others, for example in sports or other professions where there are certain standards or guidelines, such as correcting one’s basketball stroke or baseball swing. Nonetheless, when a person of lower occupational status, such as a janitor, tries to tell a man of higher occupation, such as a lawyer or chairman of a corporation, that he is doing something wrong, or he should do x instead, the person of higher occupation will almost never heed to the lower’s advice. This idea of ignorant social class superiority even comes up in the short story itself.

From the scientist’s point of view, his wife is close to perfection, yet the one thing preventing her from being “perfect” is her birthmark. This birthmark is something that the scientist cannot bear to live with and must get rid of it. However, from the viewpoint of his lab servant (and probably any other guy that is attracted to women), the birthmark is seen as a magical mark of beauty, or in other words, something that only adds to her rare beauty. The servant even says, “If she were my wife, I’d never part with that birthmark” (Hawthorne 89). Later when the wife passes away after the removal, the servant gave a, “…gross, hoarse chuckle” (Hawthorne 98), almost indicating that he already knew that the scientist’s wife was going to die from the experiment.

This is where the irony of the story comes back into play. The scientist, or the person of higher social status, who is rational and very well educated, lacked the foresight that his servant (not as educated, lower social class) had the entire time. This just goes to show that one must not ignore others’ ideas and advice just because of one’s selfish preconceived social assumptions. One must take a step back and see everyone as equals and respectfully accept everyone’s ideas or advice as equal, and not just toss it aside like the scientist in this story regretfully did.