Author Archives: Walter Stokes

Emulation and Originality

Posted on by
Reply

For many readers interpreting the words in a sentence can feel like deciphering a complex puzzle.  Understanding the rhetorical modes of the author/s can be difficult to understand without a sufficient background of the text’s intentions.  From the perspective of the author, his/her works are the result of extensive exercise in first reading, and then writing.  Availability to these practices were seldom found, and liklier nonexistent, for people of color in the American antebellum south.  Hager’s Word by Word describes various examples of the methods used, both by slaves and freedmen, to grasp the principles of writing for the benefit of “emancipation”.  In both A Colored Man’s Constitution and Writing a Life in Slavery and Freedom, he notes acts of persistent emulation that eventually results in the writer developing his own voice.  Hager describes the difference between emulation and originality as an act of shedding one’s fears and self-deprecation to do “something new”.  “To do something new, or something one knows other people can do better or more easily, provokes a particular kind of worry and self scrutiny, as well as a negotiation between originality and emulation (Hager, p. 3).”  Without formal training, “A Colored Man” began to learn literacy, the day he picked up the pen to copy words from the U.S. Constitution.  With every pen stroke, he inscribed into the paper, and also into his mind, the language he interpreted within the constitution.  In repetition, and through emulation, he improved, learning new vocabulary and developed this vocabulary into his conscious being.  Although “A Colored Man’s” variety of American English was a non-standard form, it was however a new form of American English.  In a paradoxical manner, “A Colored Man” gained his freedom the moment he cultivated his own, unique, written language: one that was disregarded from formal literary tradition.  In nineteenth century America, his variation’s acceptance was totally dependent on the interest of sponsors.  If he chose to dedicate his life as a publicized author, he would also be yoking himself to the opinions of the dominant literary audience of the time: a “white” dominated audience.  From his previous, and laborious, act of emancipation, he must now perform the greater task of capturing a “white” audience by using his established literary range.  He does so, through acts of critical thought, gained in the process of reading and writing the U.S. Constitution.

In John M. Washington’s case, he learned the standard variety of American English in a similar way, by transcription, but discovered his true voice through use of diary writing he composed in pencil.  In his autobiography Memories of the Past he was, to some degree, emulating his experiences through his acquisition of the standard form.  During his experiences in the American Civil War, as a southern “contraband”, he began recording specific events in pencil: as he once did during diary writing.  His use of the pencil exhibited the use of his conscious writing voice; one that was constantly interrupted during pen writings.  Hager’s observations include a pattern found in Washington’s repetition of phrasing within sentence syntax.  In these pen-written texts, Washington crosses out double phrases he wrote as a child, indicating his improvement in literacy as an adult.  This observation could have only been discovered through finding his conscious voice: one that is developed through reading and writing.  Although his only exposure, to reading, came from limited resources, Washington continued to emulate texts in writing until he found his conscious voice.  Developed by arduous reading and writing, he came to realize that his true voice came when writing in pencil.  Found in the final chapter of his autobiography, are recollections intentionally written in pencil to indicate this aspect of his literate ability.  In a way, Washington’s penciled works created a distinction between his internal and external self on the page.  His external observations (sensory) was written in pen, while his internal happenings (cognative) occurred in pencil.  Washington’s literacy clearly displays the notion that one can not learn to write, unless they have learned how to read.  To further explore this idea would be to state that one can not truly free themselves from the mind’s constraints until they have developed a speaking voice for the mind to communicate with.  Hager’s position, of cultivating and developing this inner voice, begins with reading the writings of authors, then emulating the text through writing its symbols in a relatable sequence.  With extended practice, the internal voice of the writer begins to emerge.  Once, confidently, developed, the mind begins to write independently in the form of thoughts.  It first writes ideas into the mind of the individual, then through the individual it finds itself onto an inscribable medium (or object).

 

Reflection: The Difference of Playing and Reading

Posted on by
Reply

As a reader, my involvement (with plot, characters and authorial intent) is initially always from the position of an observer.  With this type of separation, it is almost as if the reader is observing the daily events of an ant colony while reading the text.  The reader’s perspective is so far detached that it is sometimes difficult to relate, or even empathize, with the characters.  With the knowledge I possess, as a reader, playing the role of Julius felt like I was infusing him with superhuman abilities.  A textual character, who is portrayed as illiterate, becomes privy to information not only from the paratextual space, but also from the future.  By submerging myself in the role, I became capable of directly empathizing with the character.  In the process, I was removed from the safe distance of the observer and became closer to the textual environment in both time and space.  From this new, unexplored, vantage point my knowledge as a reader becomes very useful to me while navigating through the plot.

The pleasure of playing a book, in opposed to reading it, is found in the act of willingly exploring the unknown.  Reading, superficially, imposes a sense of remoteness in the reader; far away from the realities of the characters in the text.  This makes it convenient for a reader to close the book when he/she/they feel[s] uncomfortable.  By playing the role, discomfort in the reader is raised, in turn, bringing them closer to the realistic content of the author’s intentions.  A frustration of mine, while playing the book, was identifying a familiar framework to work within while exploring the world of Chesnutt’s tales.  I annotated motifs from Chesnutt’s tales and discovered that it can be read, somewhat, as a chivalric romance.  In this hypothetical framework, Chesnutt’s use of magic, spells and enchantments afforded me the opportunity to make moves in the textual environment that would help, Julius, breach into the paratextual space.  With access to the paratextual space, a textual character can directly interact with observers, or readers; even if for a moment’s time.  In the dimensional realm of stage work, this act would be similar to beaching the fourth wall of the audience: a metanominal action that creates a direct interaction between textual character and reader.  In an abstract mode of thought, the textual character is always subject to the emotions of the reader.  Playing a book, bridges the gap between the roles of reader and character.  This helps the character break the restrictions of the author’s intentions, in turn, helping character develop a consciousness independent from the author’s.

Playing the role of a textual character in Chesnutt’s tales, for me, involved drafting actions that were limited to the characterization of the character.  For example, the character I played was the embodiment of an antiquated relic.  Julius was a living object of experience.  Recorded into his mind were the experiences of chattel slavey in the antebellum south.  As an elderly man, he is still, somewhat, cognizant of the subjugator/subjugated dynamic found in most social interactions and attempts to manuver through a new, unknown form of this relationship.  From his perspective, the effects of chattel slavery remain as a part of his being, even though its practice is no longer in use.  If playing again, I would change my role to a paratextual character, just to imagine what it was like from the position of a literary authority.  In doing so, I would possess the ability to weigh Chesnutt’s work with limitless capacity; drawing from cogent empirical evidence to support the stances in my moves.  One drawback of playing a textual character is that there are finite resources which can be employed: resources that are only found in the author’s frames (structuring).

To properly analyze my moves (in game 3), I took a snapshot of the text-fields and cropped them together and a collage of total content for each move.  This aesthetic arrangement made it easier for me to indicate plot points introduced by my fellow players. From these, hand-picked, plot points I was able to make moves that, somewhat, coalesced in historical accuracy, authorial intent and political climate.  As a suggestion, for future users of the platform, would it be possible to incorporate a snapshot feature of each move?  For instance, when all players have completed move#1, a snapshot is formed of all player moves, then merged into a single image for visual analysis.  This removes the need to click back and forth between player responses while gathering information.  This would also make the points of entry (for moves 2, 3 and 4) easier for all users.  As with the original rules, the first player to post gains the priority of the move#.  Overall, I had a great time playing the book and would like to thank admin for making this possible.  Keep up the great work!

Blackness, Whiteness and Freeness as Inscriptions

Posted on by
Reply

Frederick Douglass’ experiences in Narrative of the Life of Frederick Douglass and My Bondage and Freedom described his great effort of producing a historical consciousness for himself, by employing himself to acts of writing.  Outside of the United States, in England, he experienced his first taste of freeness: placing Douglass beyond the reach of the ideologies that perpetuated the slave system in America.  His painful upbringing describes the structurally repressive forces that defined his “blackness”, along with his sense of “freeness”.  By lineating Christian religious beliefs with the justified actions of his subjectors, Douglass accounted for various examples of metaphoric language, in the Christian bible, and found their counterparts in the role-play amongst members of American society in the mid-nineteenth century.  This brings to mind the concept of ideological state apparatuses by late 20th century philosopher Louis Althusser, who claimed that the institutions of church, family and cultural traditions are constructs which directly contribute to the social role-play of public life.  Through this lens, a person can be conditioned to become either a slave or a master from birth.  If one is conditioned to be a slave and the other is educated in owning and managing slaves, upon interaction both will fulfill the social roles prescribed at birth: both will be slaves to tradition.  Both will be fated to the lives set out for each, in line with the social expectations of their families and churches.  To be imbued with “blackness”, during Douglass’ time, was to fulfill the scripted role of the slave to “whiteness” in America at the time: according to Christianity.  Douglass was well aware of the employment of this technological device when, he later, on wrote about his life:

“I took my stand on the high ground of human brotherhood, and spoke to Englishmen as men, in behalf of men.  Slavery is a crime, not against Englishmen, but against God, and all the members of the human family; and it belongs to the whole human family to seek its suppression. (My Bondage and Freedom, XXIV, pg.22)”

Writing produces a historical consciousness in the writer, meaning mythic thinking becomes logical thinking the moment a thought is embedded into a medium.  This could mean putting pen-to-pad, inputting keystrokes into a text-field, or even reading pages to stimulate, and influence, the mind.  Flusser’s essay Does Writing Have a Future describes writing as an action that used to involve digging into.  Mesopotamian clay tablets metaphorically related to the creation myth found in the book of Genesis, involving clay being used as a medium to create man.  Man is, or was, an inscription of conscious thought imbued into the clay to form a version of history, according to Flusser:  “One who writes by digging can only hope that the subject one has engraved doesn’t decay too quickly (even if the digging writer was God). (pg.13)”  To have one’s ideas projected into the world to be received, is to become the idea itself.  When writing, a person becomes an extension of his/her self.  In writing, the person becomes the authority of his/her life and gradually begins to understand the “freeness” found in its practice .  By constantly reading Douglass was able to view the inscriptions of other writers.  As their ideas reflected off of the pages and into his mind, he grew aware of his dire condition and dedicated his life to gaining more “freeness”.

Other Than American

Posted on by
Reply

In regard to Dubois’ views on the black experience in America, a question is posed as to whether or not the “negro” struggle is grounded enough in ideology to create change in America.  Dubois asserts the concept of double-consciousness which splits the American negro’s identity into two parts.  One part consists of a person identifying as an “American”, while the other identifies as “Negro”.  The cognizance of the person effected is what defines this splitting: of how one views one’s self internally (as “Black”, and other than of Eurocentric tradition) and also how one views one’s self in regard to Americanness.  As as example, Dubois elaborates on the oneness of identity, found in America, that was taught to free-men based in schools of Greek thought.  This assertion lends itself to an assumption that If Greek culture is taught as mainstream culture, while excluding the negro, then the negro, in America, will always be lacking the historical foundation to adequately contribute to society.  With this in mind, one can state that a historical record is necessary for a cultural tradition to perpetuate itself.  Deeper into the history of a cultural tradition is the language used to communicate information.  Within tradition, the language system is used to transmit, in a basic sense, the oral foundation of a people and their beliefs.

From its conception, the core belief founding America was, and still is, the idea of freedom (however defined in the mind of human thought).  The double-conscious that Dubois speaks about hinders the America Negro to a frame of mind that leaves him/her incomplete, side-tracked and derailed from the single-minded consciousness of most “free” people.  Along with this notion, a question can be raised asking to clarify what freedom actually is in essence.  How can one worship and covet freedom (in any sense) without exerting a complete and unified effort toward it?  If any person is to accomplish the unachievable him/her must imbed, or inscribe, the idea confidently within themselves without fear death in their actions.  Aside from direct influences, a person must be willing to die by their cause, regardless of how ridiculous it may seem to others: both on an individual level and, especially, as a group.  Dubois alludes to the Negro struggle in American as an effect of assimilating a culture that ultimately refused to represent them.  When Eurocentric values are taught with intention of propagating its cultural system, it includes those whom are to be represented by it and excludes those who are an “other” to its value system.