The readings for this week both have to do with the sublime and sensibility. I enjoyed them not only because they were short but also because they were very deep in this thought. I have always had trouble wrapping my head around these two terms. They seem to be so heavy and weighted, there meaning is almost obscure to me. These poems and works of short fiction all had beautiful imagery in them. Sublime and sensibility seems to be a harder concept for me than any other literary movement. I just cannot wrap my head around what they are saying.

I did enjoy the poems but I identify more with romanticism. I think it is because Romanticism is still present in today’s society. Sensibility is such a hard concept. I did read the readings this week but find it hard to identify the poems with sensibility.

Here is a long-awaited link to my Ann Yearsley presentation. Enjoy!

Link: ann-yearsley

I have decided that I will write my essay on anti-slavery narratives using Equiano’s The Interesting Narrative and Hannah More’s The Slave Trade. I will specifically look at the role these poems played in the abolition movement and how the two texts symbolize the changes in British society in the Eighteenth Century. I would appreciate feedback from Dr. Jones on this topic. Also, I will be posting a link to my presentation later today. Sorry for the delay.

The reading for this week was a novel/novella by Samuel Johnson entitled The History of Rasselas. The novel was very interesting in that it gave a visual, episodic plot. But, I did not like the fact that this novel was unuplifting. The message of this book could be described as an anti-self help book. The message was very much tell-it-like-it-is. That was the one disappointment in this novel. When I read something, I want it to be uplifting. I think the fact that Johnson’s mother was dying while he was writing this has something to do with that. That being said, that was the only thing that I saw wrong with this text.

Also, I will post a link later today to my powerpoint presentation that I did last week on Ann Yearsley.

This week’s readings all had to do with satire in the form of short prose and poetry in the eighteenth century. The authors we looked at this week were Daniel Defoe, Jonathan Swift and Lady Mary Montagu. These authors can be considered to be some of the greatest authors of the eighteenth century.  These readings were all unique and the only one I seemed to dislike was Swift’s A Modest Proposal because it seemed to ramble on a bit too much and made no sense.

The most interesting of all the readings was Swift’s The Lady’s Dressing Room and Lady Montagu’s response to Swift’s poem. The Lady’s Dressing Room was a no-holds barred, descriptive poem of the female’s dressing room and the disgusting nature of it. The poem was very sing-songy and featured lines like:”But oh! it turned poor Strephon’s bowels,/When he beheld and smelt the towels,/Begummed,bemattered, and beslimed/With Dirt, and Sweat, and Ear-Wax grimed” (Swift 503). It is a very descriptive, disgusting poem and its up there with the sexual descriptiveness of “Signor Dildo”.

It is also interesting to look at Lady Montagu’s response. You can tell she is upset at Swift and attacks him viciously in her poem. To finish off the poem, Montagu writes: “[...]I’m glad you’ll write,/You’ll furnish paper when I shite’” (Montagu 703). Montagu’s poem is also very sing-songy, probably to match the style of Swift’s poem. She uses this poem to make the point that men are no different that women and to tell Swift how dare he write about a women that way.

Defoe’s work was also interesting in that he actually got arrested for writing it. Defoe was angry at the monarchy and this piece of short prose was a scathing criticism of the monarchy and the Church. The irony in all this is that Defoe’s work was not understood when it was first released. This makes for a powerful work. All in all, this week’s readings were very interesting and truly captured the spirit of the time along with some very serious issues.

Hello everyone. Here is the URL for my webpage: annyearsleyforengl3204.webonsites.com

Thanks and enjoy!!!!

I really enjoyed the reading this week by Equiano. It really presents a different view of slavery from the perspective of a slave. It also presents Equanio’s life as one which was beneficial for him in certain ways. Equiano was lucky to be with owners who valued him for his talents and trated him better than most slaves. But, Equiano still did not want to be a slave. He felt he was restricted.

It was an interesting read not only because of the surreal aspect of the reading but also because of Equiano’s main arguement. “But by changing your conduct, and treating your slaves as men, every cause of fear would be banished. They would be faithful, honest, intelligent and vigorous; and peace, prosperity, and happiness, would attend you” (Equiano 1014). This is the constant theme running through Equiano’s story. He feels that the way he has been treated has been great compared to most slaves and that he does not see why it cannot be universal.

I also enjoyed the article about the controversy of this text. I somehow think that this text is not a work of fiction. But, the text does seem surreal to me. It just seems that this treatment of slaves would not work. You could possibly have them run away as was the fear of one of Equiano’s masters in the text. But, I think that this system could work because these slaves might, such as Equiano, be afraid to lose their lack of abuse.

This week’s readings had to do with amatory fiction. We looked at Eliza Haywood, Aphra Behn and Manley. Of the three readings, I liked Fantomina by Eliza Haywood the best. It was a very interesting read because of the use of disguises by the main character in order to get Beauplasir’s love and affection. I could not help but feel kind of mad at “Fantomina” or what ever she is called at the attemp to win someone over by being someone else. I really enjoyed the ending of this text because in the end she gets what she deserves. Her mother finds out what happened and demands her to stop this. Then she gets pregnant and is forced to reveal her lover. Poor Beauplasir has no idea.

Beauplasir is so gullible. He has no idea that this is the same woman that has managed to seduce him not once, not twice, but three times as three different people!! It makes me wonder how gulliable males, including myself, are in terms of women. All in all, i really enjoyed this text.

I also liked the text written by Manley. It was astonishing to see the lust and desire that two individuals like the Duke and Charlot had for each other. I also found it neat that Manley writes such gossipy fiction during this period. Not only is it for entertainment, but it proves a point. Manley seems to, in the first few pages, describe the atributes of men and women and their functions in society. This text seems to present the male as the typical fighter and knight and the female as the desperate, love-obsessed maiden.

I really enjoyed the readings this week and they were very interesting because they, to me, are so unusual of the stereotypical writing of the time.

This week, the class was to read different kinds of restoration life writing. I found the readings to be much more dull than last weeks readings. But, how can you follow up poems of a very sexually descriptive nature. But at the same time these writings show roots of the modern bigography and the modern autobiography which is what makes them so historic.

The first writing was from John Bunyan. It was interesting in the fact that he could connect the events that were happening to him to passages in the Bible. I don’t know of many people who can connect all of their experiences to Biblical scriptures. It was also probably the most “christian” of the readings. The second reading was by Pepys. It was like the title said a diary. I did not see anything interesting in this but the first two readings are very emblematic of the “Diary” tradition.

The Next reading by Montagu reminded me of a novel. It was just as descriptive as a novel especially the first two letters. Most life writing that I have read does not compare itself to this. This is also unlike much of the life writing that exists today. The next two readings were about Samuel Johnson. I found the first reading Life of Johnson to be less about his life and more about the conversations that Boswell had with him.

All in all, these readings are very historical because they show how biographical writing evolved. To me that is what makes these writings essential to the development of the modern biography and autobiography.

In today’s class we discussed three poets of the Restoration Era: Aphra Behn,  Katherine Phillips and John Wilmot. These poets all deal in different ways with love and its effects and situations. It seemed that the poetry got steamier and steamier as we went along. I really liked the comparison between Phillips and Behn that was pointed out today. I like Behn’s poetry more because of her use of elevated language to disguise the actual actions.

Phillips seems to be more virtuous and discrete in her actions such as in “The Virgin” where the poem acts as a kind of list of virtuous things. You have to remember that this is during the Puritan period where strict Christian morals were the way. it was a conservative period. This poem also reminded me of that part in the Bible that describes love: “Love is patient, love is kind, love is not boastful,etc”. This poem almost serves the same function except that it describes the way in which a Virgin female should act.  The list seems to be almost contradicting itself: “A face that’s modest, yet serene/ A sober, and yet lively Mein”. It can be traced to that Bible passage because it in effect doing the same thing in describing love. Love is one thing but it can’t be too much like it or it will become another is something that this same poem argues.

Wilmot on the other hand is just plain vulgar. I could not help but laugh at “Signor Dildo”. At the same time, the poem is very sexualized and sad. It is a liberalized version of the truth. The poem is like a long rant a guy is having to his drinking buddies in a bar. The main character never seems to stay put and just keeps going and going and getting turned on by the fact that he can get anything he wants. I agree with the comment made in class today about this poem degrading women and making the seem like whores and it does. But, to some extent, it is not surprising that this is coming from the mind of a man who saw his fair share of excitement over the years. It is difficult for me to say, but if a women wrote this during this time, there might have been a lot more outrage than if a man wrote this.