Afternoon! I Have Gone Through

¶ … afternoon!

I have gone through the entire selection and added both the transitions and the reference to the time each artist created his or her work. I have not deleted anything; I will let you choose which to omit.

Indivisible, Yet Individual: The Challenge of Finding Self in the Madding Majority

The Pledge of Allegiance calls on reciters to swear loyalty to: "One nation, under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all." The Declaration of Independence, in contrast, states: "We hold these truths to be self-evident - that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness." This creates a dichotomy. On one hand, Americans are called upon to swear allegiance to the collective whole; on the other, Americans hold the right to liberty, and the right to pursue happiness as they see fit. When the desires of the individual conflict with the wants of the many, how can that conflict be resolved? What happens if an individual's happiness depends upon preserving traditions sacred to his or her culture, but the culture in which they are enmeshed look upon those traditions as odd, or worse, ignorant or wrong? Can someone who society considers strange ever feel accepted, and, if they can not, can we truly say that we live in one indivisible nation?

Many writers have addressed the central conflict of the individual vs. society. In works of fiction, this conflict often resolves with the protagonist's further isolation, instead of a joyful integration and acceptance by peers. In poetry, the soul of the artist who feels lost, alone, at odds with the society around them, the cry to be recognized, to be seen as who they are as a person, not as a part of the whole, becomes nearly palpable in their words. The works of poets like Langston Hughes, Steve Connell, and Beau Sea speaks of the struggles of the blacks, of the artists, and of the immigrants to both be themselves and become a part of the society around them. Whatever the cause of isolation, whatever the cause of the difference, the strive to be recognized as both one alone and one of a larger collective is universal.

In both Hughes and Connell, we see the American who exercises his right to be himself in the face of obstacles. In Hughes' work, it is the segregation and prejudice he faces as a black man in white, "polite," society; in Connell, the striving of the dissident to make his views known, even though they bring controversy.

Essayists, too, explore the dichotomy between the individual and society. The works of Eric Black, Herman Melville, Nathaniel Hawthorne, and Langston Hughes explores what it means to be, in the words of the rock band's singer, Bono, one, but not the same. In Hughes, we see the predicament faced by African-Americans in a nation where they enjoy the freedom to write about their disillusionment with a dubious freedom that still allows blacks to be lynched and imposes a fee to exercise the right to vote. In Hawthorne, we see a society subjugated by injustice, and saved by a phantasm champion who frees the people from tyranny. In Melville's character of Bartleby, we see the tragic defeat of a soul who prefers not to bend to the dictates of life in a cold, disconnected, industrial society, even though it brings his demise.

While the rights of minorities and women have improved over the years, there remains a disparity in American society in the way those who are seen as "different" are treated vs. those who are seen to be a member of some exclusive yet illusory club. The works of writers from Hawthorne to Hughes are separated by decades, yet still echo the same distinct cry: How can I be heard? How can I be seen? What is liberty, if it means isolation? What is freedom, if it means conformity? Although the question of how to resolve the dichotomy between the needs of the one to self-express and the needs of the many to join in unity as one society, one culture, remains unanswered, there will be no cessation of the efforts of writers, poets and artists to find their own way in the madding crowd.

"I am the darker brother/They send me to eat in the kitchen when company comes...because they'll see how beautiful I am and be ashamed/I, too, am America" (Hughes, "I, Too")

In the poem "I, Too," Langston Hughes explores the contrast between the way "polite society," treats the black man vs. how they treat those who are white. Despite the way the speaker of the poem is brushed aside and treated as inferior, he seemingly never flags in his loyalty to his country. Rather, the speaker "sings" America. The America the speaker sings of is one that does not isolate people based upon the color of their skin, but rather one that sees the beauty in every person. Hughes concludes his poem with the speaker saying that he will sit with company, and they will not tell him to eat in the kitchen, because they will see that he is beautiful be ashamed. Whether this reality is one that is present or one that is only hoped for, it expresses Hughes desire for America to see that people are not different under the color of their skin; rather, they are all unique and beautiful, and should be celebrated for being who they are. The poem's concluding line, "I, too, am America," embodies Hughes belief that all who inhabit this land have the same worth, and all deserve the freedoms that America offers regardless of color. Hughes penned this poem in a time when segregation was still a reality.

"I repeat the oath, too, but I know that the phrase about "liberty and justice" does not fully apply to me. I am an American - but I am a colored American. Yet, America is a land where, in spite of its defects, I can write this article. Here, the voice of democracy is still heard..." (Hughes, "Pledge of Allegiance.")

Just as he did in his earlier poem, Hughes explores the dichotomy between the self in thre free American society, and the realities of life as a black man. Hughes brilliantly describes the issues facing those who are black in America face. Hughes knows that the phrase, "liberty and justice," does not fully apply to him, or to any who are colored. When Hughes wrote these words, segregation was still in effect, as were Jim Crow laws. Blacks could not eat at the same lunch counters as whites. They could not drink from the same water fountains, nor use the same restrooms. Should they have desired public transportation, they had to be prepared to give up their seat to the first white person who wanted it. Should they be suspected of having a relationship with a white person, they faced the ultimate penalty - the death penalty - via lynching. To be black in early 19th century America was to follow a strict set of rules, rules that did not encourage individuality. Among fellow African-Americans, they could relax and be themselves, but under the watchful and judgmental eye of most of society, they had to be deferential and obedient. Although the days of slavery had come to an end, black Americans were still enslaved by their skin color, their very survival dependent upon obeying the rules of a society who saw them as less than fully American. By law, Hughes was free when he penned this essay; however, in reality, his behavior was dampened by the reality of segregation and the very real possibility of lynchings.

Thomas Jefferson once said that every generation should write its own Constitution. This remark is sometimes used to suggest Jefferson was a poor prognosticator. After all, the charter written in his generation is still standing. But Jefferson's comment can be taken the opposite way, because every generation of Americans has indeed rewritten the Constitution to bring it into sync with contemporary values." (Black, "Our Constitution: The Myth that Binds Us.")

Like Langston Hughes, Eric Black explores the contrast between the rights ensured to the individual by the Constitution as opposed to the social dictates that can restrict those freedoms. Eric Black writes of the Constitution. Not the Constitution that hangs under glass in Washington, DC, but of the Constitution that makes up the collective mythos of American society. He argues that it is not what is actually written on the parchment that matters; rather, it is the way we, the modern readers, interpret its words in the context of our society. Black reminds us that the Constitution was not always interpreted to guarantee freedom for women nor freedom for blacks. Rather, the Constitution changed with the times, and, as Americans recognized the inherent rights of all people regardless of color or gender, we as a society projected those rights as being written indelibly onto the parchment that makes up the law of our country. Rather than being a negative thing, Black views the subjectivity of Constitutional interpretation to reflect the very freedoms we as Americans say it embodies in ink. Although when Black penned his book, blacks and women had attained all the rights formerly available only to white men, a different interpretation of "freedom" still depended upon one's color or gender.

"Sure there is a document called the Constitution. That's no myth. It's in Washington, under glass, if you want to visit it. But the Constitution that binds us is the one we have in our heads. That mythic Constitution performs functions no 200-year-old parchment ever could." (Black, "Our Constitution: The Myth that Binds Us")