Dakota Holey ENG 322 Dr. Bilbro The Age of Retrospection: Characters of Unity in a Time of Conflict Perhaps one of the most clarifying definitions of society in nineteenth century America can be summarized through the theme of struggle and conflict between a conventional world and the budding age of industry. As literature illustrates, the era of progress was marked with much conflict between varying social constructs, as people tried to make room for the quickly evolving presence of new technology and other modern advancements. Such disputes included the rising issues on slavery, women s rights, class and racial differences, the settling of the West, and the tension between maintaining the pastoral and promoting the wonders of forward thinking industry. Many authors from this era recognized these struggles and incorporated them into their writings, both to personally wrestle with their own thoughts on such issues as well as to present their ideas in order to affect the mindset of the public. One such way they accomplished these objectives was by finding ways to assimilate themes of both the modern and the conventional in their writings, usually blending them together to form examples of how both ways of life could fit together into one. Often such examples became personified in characters who seemed to embrace both the old and the new, who were able to bridge the gap between two ideals and synthesize their meanings to varying effects. Three characters from 19th century literature in particular seem to attempt to fulfill their roles as bridge pieces: Magawisca from Catherine Maria Sedgewick s Hope Leslie, Thoreau in his autobiographical account Walden, and Clarence from Mark Twain s A Connecticut Yankee in King Arthur s Court. As is demonstrated in their narratives, these three characters have the ability to effectively operate with one foot each in very different worlds, symbolizing the apparent wish of the authors for resolution and harmony in a
conflicted age. Although all three come to very different ends and accomplish different things, it is clear that they serve a distinct unifying purpose in the worlds they inhabit. Before looking at these characters and how they serve as bridges between cultures, it is important to gain a clearer understanding of some of the mindsets authors possessed during this time. The main philosophical bent of the culture was transcendentalism, the idea that there are human truths which transcend nature and experience, yet are still knowable. As Dana Rus notes in her article The Role of Transcendentalism in Shaping American Cultural Ideology : The main contributions that Transcendentalism brought to the growth and maturation of the American myth are two basic ideas revolving around a system of philosophical belief: the concept of the New World as a place to start over and affirm one s capacities to the fullest and an ardent belief in the powers of a self reliant American (247 48). As Americans began to realize their capabilities of and the ambitions for their country, social conflict began to rise. After all, the American dream probably would never have been achieved without the exploitation of both slaves and the Native Indians. Settling the West meant pushing out the indigenous people groups and establishing successful commerce required the slave trade and the railroad. Most transcendentalist authors did not agree with these exploits, however, since Thoreau was an abolitionist and close friends with Ralph Waldo Emerson, the transcendentalist pioneer. Rus points out this paradox as well, noting the transcendental desire to find self reliance and the essence of forms without the influence old systems. Emerson himself wrote in his introduction to Nature :
Our age is retrospective. It builds the sepulchres of the fathers. It writes biographies, histories, and criticism. The foregoing generations beheld God and nature face to face; we, through their eyes. Why should not we also enjoy an original relation to the universe? Why should not we have a poetry and philosophy of insight and not of tradition, and a religion by revelation to us, and not the history of theirs? This statement shows the struggle of great writers and thinkers during this time period. Authors were clearly influenced by the dominant philosophy of the time, whether they were professed transcendentalists or not. As America seeks to establish its own identity, it still relies on drawing context from the past. The nation needs synthesis of thought, which could explain why so many writers explored this theme within their texts. One such author who does this is Catherine Maria Sedgwick, in her novel Hope Leslie. This novel explores the relationship between the Puritans of Boston and the local Native American tribes and the conflicts that arise between race and gender. As both sides try to defend themselves through violence and segregation, Magawisca, the daughter of the Pequot chief Mononotto, stands above the rest as an example of a character who makes an effort to bridge the void between these two warring people groups. Magawisca s position is by far a unique one. After her captivity in Boston and the death of her mother, she is brought to the home of William Fletcher, a kind man who welcomes her into his home and whose benevolence leads Magawisca to love and care for the Fletcher family in return. Her faculties as a bridge character demonstrate themselves many times throughout the novel. The most obvious example is Magawisca s ability to speak both in English and in the Pequot language, making her a valuable asset to both sides as
an interpreter. However, her ties as a bridge character run much deeper than mere matters of comprehension. In her heart, Magawisca both loves and respects the Fletcher family as well as her own family. She willingly sacrifices her own wellbeing to help Everell escape from her father when he takes him hostage. She looks out for Faith Leslie as she grows up in the Indian tribe and marries Magawisca s brother, Oneco. When either side threatens violence or foul play, Magawisca is the one who jumps in to help mediate and keep the peace, protecting both sides from the machinations of the other. She loves both Everell and Hope Leslie as her own kin, and works to secure their happiness while forsaking her own. Like the Puritans, she is intelligent, well mannered, and pious; like the Pequots, she is loyal, wise, and devoted to her culture. In short, Magawisca seems to be the perfect blending of two worlds, existing in both to bring about peace and understanding between the two cultures and proving herself as a woman in a male dominated society. Unfortunately, her role ends in a way that is arguably unsatisfying. Although throughout the entire narrative she fulfills her bridge role beautifully, in the end she does not maintain the role, but goes back to the Pequots to care for her father. Her talents are only required as long as Everell and Hope need them to bring about their own happy endings; after this is accomplished, Magawisca completely disappears, leaving Everell and Hope to marry and leaving the reader wondering what happens to this fascinating and perhaps most nuanced character in the story. Even though Sedgewick appears to actively endorse the equality of both races and genders ( You surely do not doubt, Martha, that these Indians possess the same faculties that we do. The girl, just arrived, our friend writes me, hath rare gifts of the mind... [Sedgewick, 21]), it also seems that she believes each group has their own separate place. The Puritans belong in Boston, and
the Pequots belong in the woods. Therefore, by the conclusion of the novel, it only makes sense that Magawisca would give up her position as interpreter and bridge character to go back to her tribe where she belongs. Even though Magawisca had to leave Boston for legal reasons, her ending still feels like a cop out, and the reader cannot help but wonder what would have happened if she had remained involved in the lives of the Puritans. This demonstrates Sedgewick s apparent sentimentalities on the issue as far as the reader can conclude; let there be more harmony but less unity. End the violence, but each person keep to their own side. Thus, the reader gains one perspective of the bridge character, and one author s ideas for the synthesis of the country. Another author and famed transcendentalist who addresses such issues is Henry David Thoreau in his book Walden. Through his musings on the banks of Walden pond, Thoreau serves as the bridge character to his own narrative as he ponders the conflict between the pastoral and technology. Leaving the town of Concord to live in the woods for two years seems like a blatant siding with the pastoral; however, Thoreau cannot help but rely on his understanding of the industrial age to help inform his musings. Leo Marx notes Thoreau as a conflicted character in this respect in The Machine in the Garden: Technology and the Pastoral Ideal in America : Here is another pastoral interlude, a celebration of idleness and that sense of relaxed solidarity with the universe that presumably comes with close attention to the language of nature. For a moment Thoreau allows us to imagine that he has escaped the clock, the Concord definition of time and, indeed, the dominion of the machine. But then, without raising his voice, he reports the rattle of railroad cars in the woods.
It is easy to argue that Thoreau is a more reluctant bridge character than Magawisca. While he seems to push for the pastoral and the simplicity of life, his 19th century upbringing and the age of industry cannot help but creep into his narrative. Like a true transcendentalist, he seeks a life of self reliance; yet he often describes his forays into town, the camaraderie he feels with the railroad workers, and his appreciation for commerce: Commerce is unexpectedly confident and serene, alert, adventurous, and unwearied... I am refreshed and expanded when the freight train rattles past me (Thoreau, 164). In this way, Thoreau serves as the bridge between pastoral and industry, although he would arguably be more effective in the role if it was his aim from the beginning. His swaying back and forth between the two ideals is confusing for the reader and makes his position seem unclear. Although he effectively incorporates nature and machine, listing the sounds of the railroad with the sounds of the wildlife around him and blending his life at Walden with images from Concord, in the end the effect does not seem intentional. Where Thoreau does succeed as a bridge character is in his presenting the conflicted spirit of the times in an accurate and personal way. The reader can easily sense Thoreau s struggle to come to terms with his seemingly paradoxical lifestyle; yet as Rus mentions above, paradox seemed to plague the thoughts of great thinkers and writers from this century. So while Thoreau might not be a very willing bridge character, his conflict does provide a realistic picture of the synthesis between the pastoral and the industrial, even if that synthesis seems causeless and misplaced. The final bridge character discussed in this essay is Clarence from Mark Twain s A Connecticut Yankee in King Arthur s Court. Clarence is a truly wonderful character because he serves as a foil for the main character, Hank Morgan, in his almost seamless synthesis of
nineteenth century and sixth century cultures. Cushing Strout discusses Hank s worldview in his article Crisis in Camelot: Mark Twain and the Idea of Progress : Morgan is Victorian in his belief in progress, which had its root in the common American idea that the Old World and the New were polarized. The difference favored the New as the hemisphere of freedom and enlightenment in contrast to Europe, which, as Jefferson puts it, is loaded with misery by kings, nobles, and priests and by them alone. Hank very clearly does not believe in the blending of two different cultures and actively works to overthrow the church and the monarchy, and to implement his own ideas about science, industry, commerce, and education. As his accomplice and one of his closest friends, Clarence helps Hank to realize these goals, organizing and learning and taking charge of Hank s assets when he goes out adventuring. However, despite his apparent enthusiasm and willingness to dive head first into Hank s schemes, Clarence is at his core a sixth century citizen who is not afraid to challenge Hank s ideas with his own intelligence and insight. For example, in chapter forty, Clarence proposes his own thoughts on politics to Hank, showing how Hank actually respects Clarence s opinions as he combines modern ideas of reform with medieval ideas of monarchy: Clarence was with me as concerned the revolution, but in a modified way. His idea was a republic, without privileges orders but with a hereditary royal family at the head of it instead of an elective chief magistrate. He believed that no nation that had ever known the joy of worshiping a royal family could ever be robbed of it and not face away and die from melancholy. I urged that kings were dangerous.
He said, then have cats. He was sure a royal family of cats would answer every purpose... Hang him, I supposed he was in earnest, and was beginning to be persuaded by him... This exchange shows Clarence s wisdom and flexibility as a bridge character. Not only is he open minded to new ideas, but he also understands which ideas work best with the ideals of his own culture. He willingly takes Hank s idea and formats it in a way that maintains the monarchy while still accomplishing the main purpose of what Hank is trying to implement. Also, the very fact that Clarence is able to successfully maintain Hank s business when Hank is not present implies his ability to communicate nineteenth century ideals on a sixth century level. He is the one running the schools and the man factory and the West Pointe base. If he is able to keep Hank s endeavors going, working with medieval people who do not understand all of Hanks s goals and effectively building on what the Boss puts into motion. Even though Clarence is not a very prominent character, he is arguably one of the most successful examples of a bridge character from nineteenth century literature. He provides the synthesis where Hank cannot, and sound judgement that appeals to both sides. His presence also provides a look at another author who, though also struggling with the conflicted nature of America, seems to have more of an understanding of what is required to bring about unity in a disordered world. Therefore, it is easy to conclude that he is a sound character presenting a sound ideal and successfully bridging the gap between Old world and New world ideals. The nineteenth century was a time when America began to shape its own identity, giving up conventions of the past in order to remake itself into a self reliant nation. Along with these sentiments came the issues presented by the industry boom and the conflicts between races as the
West continued to be settled. There is no doubt that this was a confusing and troubling time for all, and it only makes sense that authors would struggle through such complex issues in their writing. Through the use of bridge characters, readers can sense the authors desire for unity as they use these characters to present a possibility of what the world could be like. It is through such characters that the reader can clearly grasp the author s mindset, making them arguably one of the most crucial parts in nineteenth century literature.
Bibliography Emerson, Ralph Waldo, and Jaroslav Pelikan. Introduction. Nature. Boston: Beacon, 1985. N. pag. Print. Marx, Leo. "The Machine in the Garden." The New England Quarterly 29.1 (1956): 27. Web. RUS, Dana. "The Role Of Transcendentalism In Shaping American Cultural Ideology." Studia Universitatis Petru Maior Philologia 14 (2013): 247 254. Communication & Mass Media Complete. Strout, Cushing. "Crisis In Camelot: Mark Twain And The Idea Of Progress." Sewanee Review 120.2 (2012): 336 340. Academic Search Elite.