Chapter 7

Writing to Connect Texts: Literary Analysis and Film Analysis

Writing about literature gives you the opportunity to examine and evaluate a work of literature or an element of literature that you see within the writing. Through analyzing, you read a piece of work and try to make sense of elements that you want others to know about as you see the short story, novel, or poem.

When you analyze a short story, for example, you look at the elements that make a writing a short story and you break down these elements, looking for patterns. You ask yourself

• the what—what the work is saying,
• the how—how it gets the point across, and,
• the why—why this is significant.

When we analyze visual media, we approach it essentially in the same way. We observe patterns and relationships within the text and derive meaning. Sometimes our analysis shapes our perspective. As Sullivan notes, “Writing about literature is a way of sharing literature” (1). We share our perspective when we write about film as well. The following faculty essays in this chapter explore the realm of writing about literature and film.

Writing a Literary Analysis

Robert Pfeiffer

Writing a literary analysis is, in many ways, just like writing a research essay, except you don’t have to go to the library or scour the Web for sources. In most cases, literary analysis only requires the use of the primary source (the poem, story, novel etc. being analyzed). Just like any other form of argumentative writing, your literary analysis should make a claim and support that claim with evidence. This time however, the evidence is the text itself.

When writing an analytical essay, it is important to remember this: an essay is about one thing. You should pick some aspect, theme, or device that you find interesting and fruitful, and explore that aspect as it exists within the text or texts. For example, you could analyze the theme of “love” in one poem, or in five novels, but you are still analyzing the theme of love, which is one thing. It is important to remember this because otherwise, you might fall into the trap of writing a “summary” and not an analysis. You should assume that your reader is familiar with the basic plot and characters of the text, and therefore not interested in having that explained to them again.

Here are a few things to keep in mind when working on a literary analysis:

• Do not confuse the author/poet with a character/speaker. These are different people and should be listed as such in your essay.
• When discussing a historical event, you should use the past tense.
• For example: William Shakespeare wrote Hamlet around 1600 A.D. (The writing of the play is a historical event.)
• When discussing a work of art, you should use the present tense.
• For example: Prince Hamlet ponders suicide in his famous “To be or not to be” soliloquy. (Discussion of the work of art uses present tense.)
• You still need citations for quotes and a Works Cited page.
• When citing a poem, you use the line numbers, rather than page number.

While it may seem odd to you that your professors would ask you to write about a work of literature that has already been written about countless times, remember: it is not about uncovering something new that no one has ever thought of. It is about connecting your ideas and experience to the work and becoming part of a conversation that goes on around and about art by paying close attention to it. If the choice is yours, make sure you select a work that you are fond of, or at least find interesting. You always write better when you write about something you’re interested in.

Cultural Rhetorics and the Literary Analysis

Stephanie Richardson

As citizens in this modern digital age, you’ll be composing for audiences across wide ranging cultural communities. Whether you are writing emails to friends and family, posting blogs on social media, or engaging in letter writing campaigns to your local politicians, your rhetorical strategies adjust to reflect your sense of purpose, your sense of self, and your perceptions of your audience. Unfortunately, you may have occasion to feel as though your academic writing limits your sense of voice or fails to connect with diverse audiences. One strategy of helping you write for diverse purposes across multicultural communities is to employ Cultural Rhetorics, which many of you already utilize daily.

“Cultural Rhetorics” refers to rhetorical strategies implemented by various cultural groups for a variety of purposes. What distinguishes Cultural rhetoric from traditional academic discourse is the broader perception of audience, as well as the broader perception of “academic.” Historically, what students have come to value as academic discourse has predominantly been informed by principles of Classical Rhetoric, which has origins in Greek philosophy. However, scholars have examined ways in which rhetoric functions beyond traditional perceptions. Instead of conceiving of rhetoric through narrow lenses, scholars have documented rhetorical traditions prevalent across the globe that extend beyond those of Classical Rhetoric. Even within the United States, Cultural Rhetorics include the rhetorical practices associated with ethnicity, gender, social class, age, and even political parties. That is to say that Cultural Rhetoric is expansive and dynamic; as long as the ways and spaces in which people employ language evolves, so too does Cultural Rhetorics.

Thus, you will benefit from exploring the variety of Cultural Rhetorics across America, especially if you will be communicating across diverse audiences. Furthermore, you may be surprised to learn that you may be already employing Cultural Rhetorics if you’ve ever participated in the practice of “code-switching,” which is when you alter your rhetorical choices based on audience. As an academic endeavor, though, Cultural Rhetoric extends beyond surface level linguistic utterances. In most cases, the rhetorical practices of a culture are steeped in specific worldviews, values, and beliefs. In fact, you could argue that academic discourse itself is an example of Cultural Rhetoric, as it reflects specific principles based on a particular cultural perspective. Examining Cultural Rhetorics across America, however, will enlighten you to the variety of rich rhetorical gems that exist beyond Classical Rhetoric, and that understanding will help you become a greater writer.

As you ponder the question “How can I use my knowledge of Cultural Rhetorics in my academic writing,” think about assignments that lend themselves to an exploration of one’s language and culture. A perfect space for this sort of examination is the Literary Analysis. When reading a work of literature, viewing a film, or listening to a song, you are presented with a variety of elements open for interpretation from a cultural perspective. One such element is language. Begin to ask yourself questions like what does the artist’s or author’s use of language say about characters’ social status, perceived educational background, intended audience, and/or cultural background? How does the representation of various cultural artifacts—such as one’s speech, values, traditions, and world views—reinforce OR challenge dominant perceptions associated with different cultures? How does analyzing characters’ dialect, code- switching, and traditions reflect specific themes, ideologies, or social commentary that the author or artist wants to convey to the audience?

As you examine ways in which Cultural Rhetorics are represented in literature, film, and music, you will broaden your understanding of the impact of language, culture, and rhetorical choices society. Not only can this exploration help you better understand various works of literature, film, and music, it can also strengthen your consciousness as a writer as you become more critical of the how your own rhetorical choices influence your audience’s perceptions of you.

Writing Connections

Literary analysis is a form of evaluation argument; it is also similar to mainstream book reviews and movie reviews. Similar to a literary analysis, a rhetorical analysis examines nonfiction—an essay, a speech, or an advertisement—for its rhetorical devices and appeals.

Fiction writers also publish literary criticism, in which they evaluate the merits of other literature and writers (T.S. Eliot, Virginia Wolf, Langston Hughes, for example). There are ample excellent examples of literary and rhetorical criticism written by college undergraduates in Young Scholars in Writing, available at https://youngscholarsinwriting.org/index.php/ysiw.

Suggestions For Writing

Unless your instructor provides another topic, pick your favorite movie, book, TV show, or video game and argue about some aspect of it using textual evidence to support your claim. Here are two additional choices:

• the short story on the theme of context and expectations by Ron Rash, “The Trusty,” from Nothing Gold Can Stay, originally published in The New Yorker, available online.
• another short story on the theme of context and expectations by Kate Chopin, “The Story of an Hour,” available at katechopin.org.

Consult the Purdue OWL for ideas. Some suggestions include the following:

• A discussion of the work’s characters: are they realistic, symbolic, historically-based?
• A study of the sources or historical events that occasioned a particular work

Drafting and Revising

Your draft should have ample textual evidence to support your claim. After your first draft, examine your body paragraphs carefully. The topic sentence should be general enough to cover the paragraph and the support should offer specific examples. In turn, the examples you provide should tie clearly to the topic sentence. If you find they don’t fit, don’t just cut them from your draft. Instead, cut and copy them into a section you label “the cuts.” Examine these later to see if they would fit into an existing paragraph or create a new one.

Reflecting on Writing

Reflect on your assignment and what you learned. These reflections will be useful when you create your ePortfolio later in the semester.

• What strategies did you learn for developing essays about literature or film that were helpful in your writing of this essay?
• Did you provide a hook that drew your reader in when talking about a work of literature or film?
• Did you avoid plot summary and choose a direction to your analysis?
• Did you write an analysis instead of just pointing out why you did or did not like the work?
• Did you gain insight about the plight of the human condition when reading/viewing and then writing about the work in an essay?

Focus on ePortfolio

This essay will demonstrate several of the learning outcomes required in your ePortfolio. This project, if assigned in class, might be a good choice as a Best Writing Artifact, so be sure to save a copy to revise if you choose it as your “best.”

Discussion Questions for Analyzing Literature and Film

As you read the essays below, consider the following questions:

• Is there a particular passage or scene that sums up the main idea or highlights it dramatically?
• Is there a nagging question that comes to mind as you read, looking for the main idea or theme?
• Is there a striking image that makes you have that ah-ha moment where you know what the theme is?
• What thematic connections can you make that remind you of situations that exist today?
• What is the style of the work? How is it related to the theme?
• What do the main characters do in the body of the work? How do these actions relate to the theme?
• Are there any ideas or themes that are not fully developed?
• What technical devices are used to support the theme?

Film Review Model Is Erik Killmonger our Hero? A Film Review of Marvel’s
Black Panther (2018)

Khalilah Ali

While we celebrate Marvel’s sci-fi epic Black Panther, swathed in our finest beauty supply store purchased knock-off Dutch wax fabric (read about the interesting history of your favorite “kente” inspired print), many moviegoers have engaged in conversations around celebrating blackness worldwide. What resonated with me when viewing director Ryan Coogler’s and cutie Michael B. Jordan’s interpretation of the character was—is Erik Killmonger, the film’s baddie, our hero here and not T’Challa? (I will try my darndest to keep it spoiler free). Jordan’s character may indeed be the hero or, at least, the anti-hero of the film. However, Killmonger’s heroism or lack thereof is not what makes him such a powerful character. Instead, Coogler’s use of Killmonger as the metonym for black Americaness has far more relevance to the film’s plot.

Killmonger’s storyline in the film, not reflected in the comics, reveals a specific angst of those African descendants who were victims of European enslavement: Why did you (Africans) let them (White folks) take us, and didn’t come and liberate us from captivity? The short and simple of it

is they were busy fighting off colonization and the missionary zeal that reinforced it, and since Twitter didn’t exist then, the news of the miserable slavocracy wasn’t immediately apparent. Some historians have done a fabulous job vindicating the oppressors’ misappropriation of technology for violence, and the European’s savvy exploitation of long beefs between people on the African continent, who had no reason to see themselves as a racialized collective in the same way Europeans had no real concept of a white identity until pseudo-scientists came along and invented taxonomies of race that subsequently elevated Whiteness, systematized social Darwinism, and codified ideologies bound up with notions of the “white” man’s burden. Before, as exemplified by the 100 Years War, Europeans also stayed set tripping. The intentional destabilization of African governments, specifically to exploit resources including African bodies,

is unquestionable. The triangle trade is predated by an Arab slave trade, which is predated by a trans-African Mediterranean trade, wherein women were the prized commodity—yes, for sex, but more importantly for the African woman’s ability to produce offspring that could repopulate kinship groups who were decimated by war, famine, or disease. African slaves by the time they’d hit ports to be finally sold in the European triangle slave trade had, on average, been traded seven times in the region.

This is where Killmonger’s point gets somewhat messy. Who is to blame? Some African groups particularly on the former Ivory Coast and Bight of Benin in West Coastal Africa still have families who made their fortunes in the slave trade. In the same way, MANY American and European power brokers, not just plantation owners, can thank the trade, labor and general commodification of black bodies for enriching their coffers and that of their progeny. Not to absolve or romanticize Africans or their resistance, but by the 19th century, the collective nations that make up the continent of Africa had agreed to fight the trade and had actively resisted European enslavement and colonization. A blog post is insufficient to relay the numerous examples of African leaders, including the oft-touted Queen Nzinga, who pushed back European encroachment once they figured out what had been occurring in the New World’s slave system. In some of the most ravaged areas of west coastal and central Africa, enslaved folks retained their humanity despite their desparate status, in the West, not so much. Of course, the Johnny-come-lately-wokeness regarding the fate of enslaved Africans suffering in the triangle trade is a thing, but we’d be remiss to ignore the complicity of some of the greedier African traders who continue to engage in the trade even today in places such as present day Tunisia and the Sudan.

Consider—while we sit on our presentist self-righteous mud-clothed draped high horse—if a neighboring group that your clan had conflict with for millennia was caught and enslaved, you’d rejoice too. Hell, some of us are ready to kill another person from a different country, state, ward, neighborhood or zone—all drawn along lines we had no say in shaping, in a nation where black bodies were used to support the theft of land from its original inhabitants (“we” were here too btw). It’s all so messy. However, I couldn’t help but sympathize with African American Killmonger’s plight, his angsty fineness and his argument espoused during the film’s climax: when the kidnapping of indigenous Africans was discovered by the various civilizations that made up the continent’s leadership, what was the response, and what is the current response? Killmonger asks this question to T’Challa and the leaders of Marvel’s fictional Wakanda. Our black American antagonist Killmonger, the metonym for diasporic blackness, made a direct bloodline claim to the country’s throne. Killmonger didn’t only demand Wakandan citizenship, but also his birthright. The right to claim the throne and reparations from Wakandans for their failure to avenge (no pun intended) the desolation of African peoples spread throughout the diaspora. Although, I have attempted to answer Killmonger’s impassioned rhetorical question, I still think the violence he inflicts on his fellow Wakandans is an outpouring of those feelings of abandonment. Not justifiable, but certainly understandable.

Published Essays: Literary or Film Analysis

All of the essays listed below are excellent examples of this genre.

• Kate Chopin, “The Story of an Hour”
• Alice Walker, “The Welcome Table”
• Jamaica Kincaid, “Girl”

Student Examples: Literary or Film Analysis

Michael Jones II
Dr. Sansbury
ENGL 1101
29 June 2021

Grief as Displayed in
Wandavision

Wandavision is a miniseries that aired on Disney+ from January to March of 2021. It follows Wanda Maximoff proceeding through the 5 stages of grief after losing the man she loved in an attack on Earth. The man she loved, Vision, was an android who fought alongside her, facing multiple threats against the planet and, eventually, the universe. Due to Vision’s human characteristics, he and Wanda fell in love with each other. However, their romance was short-lived because he was killed in front of her during battle, which ultimately broke down Wanda to her core; following their victory against the enemy, she left her team and went to Westview, New Jersey, where she and Vision had bought a lot of land to settle down one day. Here, she utilized her powers to create a new Vision, change the setting of the town to fit a black-and-white 1950s era sitcom, and control the minds of all the citizens to believe they are part of her fantasy.

Welcome to denial, our first stop in going through the stages of grief. In this phase, people tend to hold onto a more preferred reality, rather than the one they are faced with, and will do whatever it takes to stay in their fantasy such as with Wanda (Morrow). She has crafted a projection from her mind of her dead lover and has placed him, herself, and two fictitious twins in a The Dick Van Dyke Show lampoon where Wanda and Vision are married and face typical quirky conflicts found in sitcoms of that era. People from outside the town, which is encased in a magical bubble that no one can enter or leave, try to reach her via radio or imaging drones, and they are met with her leaving the bubble to confront them, threatening to kill them if they continue to intervene. It is at this point she transitions to anger.

The stage of anger is where the subject has moved on from trying to lie to themselves and, instead, becomes furious at the thought of the loss happening to them (Morrow). Once Wanda lashes out at the government agency attempting to reach out to her, she slowly fails at trying to hide her powers from the citizens of Westview yet still tries to fit into a sitcom persona of herself—at this point transitioning to a 1980s Family Ties spoof. Wanda’s anger has been building up throughout the show so far, especially whenever someone almost breaks her delusion. Now she is not afraid to let it out. During an argument with Vision over the illusions she’s cast upon Westview and its citizens, Wanda lashes out at him, and they both activate their powers, appearing as if they are about to battle when a ring at the doorbell introduces her dead brother, Pietro, into the fold.

We now come to bargaining, where typically a subject will attempt to change something about their life or situation to avoid the cause of grief (Morrow). Now in a 1990s/2000s sitcom era reminiscent of Malcom in the Middle, Wanda is fully accepting of this false projection of her dead brother, ignoring the fact that she knows he is dead and has been for a few years at this point. She rationalizes what she has done to the town by saying that they must be “at peace” like she is (Schaeffer). At a point in this phase, during the night of Halloween, Vision departs in order to investigate more about the bubble that Wanda has put them in and how to free themselves of it. During his departure, Pietro tells her he will step up and act as a father figure for the kids tonight, and she is accepting of it and carries on with her plan for the night. Accepting Vision leaving is where we begin to transition into depression.

Depression is a stage that is characterized by a loss of pleasure or interest in doing things that usually brings joy (Morrow). As popularized by sitcoms like Modern Family and The Office, we now have a setting quite like 2010s era television shows where there are handheld camera shots and cutaways from the conflict to show a one-on-one interview with a specific character regarding the conflict. Wanda’s depression is evident through her refusal to get out of bed and to put on regular, presentable clothes; instead, she is okay with leaving the house wearing pajamas and a cardigan. She also begins to cut off people close to her and push them away. When her children mention where their father is, she says that it isn’t important. She is also approached by her neighbor who offers to take the kids for the day, and Wanda doesn’t hesitate to send them off with the neighbor. At this point it’s worth noting that she begins to lose control of the setting around her: different set pieces transition in and out of certain eras of television, and she knows her façade she’s created for herself is about to fail.

With the world she created falling apart around her, Wanda knows she must come to terms with what she’s been avoiding this whole time, which represents the final stage of grief: acceptance (Morrow). In the final two episodes of the series, Wanda goes on a journey into her subconscious and is confronted with various traumatic experiences that she has bottled up inside. She comes to accept that the trauma she’s experienced is not something she should let consume her and that she, herself, as a superhero, is not someone who will ever be able to live a life like the sitcoms she watched growing up. She releases the mystical control she had over the town and says, “goodbye,” to the family that she had always dreamed of. Wanda then begins a new journey, dedicating herself fully to learning more about her powers and how to control them.

Works Cited

Morrow, Angela. “DABDA: The 5 Stages of Coping With Death.” Verywell Health, 6 June 2020, www.verywellhealth.com/dabda- the-five-stages-of-coping-with-death-1132148.

Schaeffer, Jac, creator. Wandavision. Marvel Studios, 2021.

2018 Sharon Sellers’ First-Year Writing Award Winner

Aubrey Stewart
Dr. Fletcher
English 1101
18 September 2018

Fiction and Reality in Octavia Butler’s
Parable of the Sower

Authors often portray aspects of their personal lives in their works of literature, whether it be a short story or an extensive novel. This may leave the reader questioning the background of the story or the underlying meaning of a character’s actions and personality. More often than not, the truth lies within the author and his or her experiences. Octavia Butler’s background has a heavy influence on her novel, Parable of the Sower, as seen with the evidence that reveals parallels between her and the protagonist, Lauren Olamina, between Butler’s hometown and the setting of the novel, and between her views on controversial topics of the world today and those in the novel.

Being a bright, mature young woman, Lauren Olamina is wise beyond her years. She enjoys writing and teaching others, as well as spreading the religion she created called Earthseed. Looking at Octavia Butler’s history and personality, the connection between Lauren and Butler becomes clear. Both are African-American women born in California, and Butler, like Lauren, “was known for her . . . impressive height” (“Octavia

E. Butler Biography”). Their physical appearances alone create a strong resemblance between Butler and Lauren. Another parallel between the two is that both have mental setbacks that challenged them day in and day out. Lauren suffers from severe hyper-empathy, which remains a defining characteristic of her character throughout the novel. Likewise, Butler “was dyslexic, but she didn’t let this challenge deter her from developing a love of books” (“Octavia E. Butler Biography”). When Lauren is forced out on the streets following the destruction of her neighborhood and people, she makes the bold decision to pretend to be a man in order to avoid unwanted attention during her travels. This detail in the novel can be compared to Butler’s high school years when she was often mistaken as a boy due to her physical appearance. This traumatizing experience ultimately may have influenced her to have Lauren pretend to be a man throughout much of the novel.

Besides their physical connections, Octavia Butler and Lauren Olamina share several hobbies. At a young age, Butler “took refuge in books” due to her reserved personality (Staples 7). Likewise, Lauren engulfed herself in books with information ranging from world religions to native plants in order to prepare for the inevitable destruction of her community. Not only do the two enjoy reading books, but they also enjoy writing. Butler, of course, took pleasure in writing science fiction, whereas Lauren writes about her thoughts, her experiences, and Earthseed in her journal. The relationship Butler creates between her personal life and Lauren Olamina’s life is evident, and understanding this connection helps the reader further understand Lauren’s character and role in the novel.

Parable of the Sower takes place in a dystopian America, focusing on regions in Southern California. Lauren Olamina lives in the walled community of Robledo which is near Los Angeles. Octavia Butler attempts to create a setting that reflects current trends she observes in the modern, urban society. For example, “Butler identifies the walling of communities as one process that is actually and already occurring in contemporary urban America” (Dubey). Growing up in Pasadena, California and “later earn[ing] an associate degree from Pasadena City College,” Butler was submerged in the urban culture and setting (“Octavia E. Butler Biography”). She uses her extensive knowledge of urban California to create a setting that portrays the results of a corrupt nation. Later in the novel, Lauren attempts to travel north towards Washington and Canada after her community is destroyed in hopes to settle where there is less turmoil between citizens and in order to potentially grow Earthseed. Likewise, “Butler abandoned her native California to move north to Seattle, Washington,” and since she wanted her works to be perfect, she “spent several years grappling with writer’s block” (“Octavia E. Butler Biography”). Lauren’s journey from one place to another closely reflects the actions that Butler took throughout her life in

order to progress her writing career and eventually become one of America’s greatest science fiction writers.

As the plot progresses, Octavia Butler presents several details of what she believes contributes to a crippling society, the beginnings of which she saw in the last decades of the 20th century when she wrote the novel. These horrifying aspects, which include “the increasing class gap, the fear of crime, the chaos of the cities spreading to the suburbs, [and] the centrifugal forces tearing our society apart,” play a key role in the development of the novel (Butler and Potts 334). However, they are not just unique to the nation in which Lauren Olamina lives, but in the nation, and world, today. Butler uses characters and their experiences in order to display these details. For example, Lauren saves two women from earthquake destruction and quickly learns that both “have suffered sexual abuse” (Agustí). Butler focuses on these crimes to society because she was distressed “that we see these things happening now in American society when they don’t have to” (Butler and Potts 334). The direct description of each of these crimes in her novel forces the reader to have a deep understanding of the detrimental effects they eventually leave on citizens and society.

Corporate slavery also prevails as a major issue in the novel as seen with the company town of Olivar, and with the experiences that several characters in the novel have of being a victim of corporate slavery. Citizens of Olivar work for the company and in return are paid extremely low salaries, forcing them into debt. Because of their debt, they inevitably are bound to the company and have no choice but to work in hopes to become debt-free. The characters of Emery and Tori Solis are prime examples of debt slaves. Emery shares their horrifying experiences of being debt slaves to Lauren and her group. She describes the beatings they suffered, how her sons were taken away from her, and how they finally managed to escape. Butler describes the city of Olivar, as well as Emery and Tori’s experiences, in order to compare it to the trends that have appeared in the past and those that continue to arise today. Specifically, it is the trend of “a few powerful people tak[ing] over with the approval of a class below them who has nothing to gain and even much to lose as a result” (Butler and Potts 334). Her novel deliberately confronts the characteristics of society which are devastating the world today by showing the direct result of them in a fictional nation.

Octavia Butler uses her novel, Parable of the Sower, as a platform to display not only her views on a declining nation but to provide insight on her experiences throughout her life. On the surface, one might see a completely fictional novel; however beneath the made-up characters and towns, lie very real problems and situations. She takes these complex issues in society and depicts them in a story that presents their effects on the relationship between desperate citizens and their nation. To further engage the reader and make the story realistic, she uses her own life as a foundation for the protagonist and setting. The realism of Butler’s fictional but realistic world motivates readers to analyze every aspect of it in order to try to understand some of the realities of the world we live in today.

Works Cited

Agustí, Clara Escoda. “Butler’s Parable of the Sower.” Extrapolation, vol. 46, no. 3, Fall 2005, Gale Literature Resource Center, link.galegroup.com/apps/doc/H1100075075/GLS?u=panther1&sid=GLS&xid=2e5374bf.

Butler, Octavia, and Stephen W. Potts. “’We Keep Playing the Same Record’: A Conversation with Octavia E. Butler.” Science-Fiction Studies, vol. 23, no. 70, Fall 1996, pp. 331-338. Gale Literature Resource Center, link.galegroup.com/apps/doc/H1100018288/ GLS?u=panther1&sid=GLS&xid=39bb1198

Dubey, Madhu. “Folk and Urban Communities in African-American Women’s Fiction: Octavia Butler’s Parable of the Sower.” Studies in American Fiction, vol. 27, no. 1, Spring 1999, Gale Literature Resource Center, link.galegroup.com/apps/doc/H1100075068/ LitRC?u=afpls&sid=LitRC&xid=85db2553.

“Octavia E. Butler Biography.” Biography.com, A&E Television Networks, 2 April 2014, https://www.biography.com/people/ octavia-e-butler-38207.

Staples, Kelli. “Octavia Butler’s Examination of Religious Values and the Human Condition in America.” Georgetown University Library, 2012, https://repository.library.georgetown.edu/ handle/10822/557703.

Hannah Eubanks
English 1101
Dr. Robert Pfeiffer
2 October 2017

Betrayal in
Hamilton: An American Musical

The theme of betrayal manifests itself in multiple different ways in Hamilton: An American Musical, written by Lin Manuel Miranda. In act one, the colonies start a revolution and break away from the King of England which leaves him feeling unwanted and angry. In act two, Alexander Hamilton is unfaithful to his wife while he and Aaron Burr go back and forth betraying one another throughout the entire act. In Hamilton: An American Musical, Miranda demonstrates the theme of betrayal and how it affects the characters’ personal and political lives.

The king of England at the time, King George, was very vocal in expressing his thoughts about the colonies’ rebellion. He was extremely pompous and boastful, and thought the colonies should have been more appreciative of him as their leader because they came from England. The king put on a brave face but he felt as if the colonies were stabbing him in the back. He trusted them to follow his reign and urged that they “have seen each other through it all,” as a last ditch effort to get them to realize they needed him to continue to thrive (Miranda). He had a brief moment of vulnerability when he stated, “I’ll love you till my dying days. When you’re gone, I’ll go mad, so don’t throw away this thing we had,” which showed how he cared for the colonies (Miranda). The king’s emotions turned to anger as he found out the colonies “cheat[ed] with the French,” who was England’s enemy, to fight against his monarchy (Miranda). Although he appeared tough on the outside, King George became quite angry as well as sentimental when the colonies betrayed him by rebelling against his rule and establishing their own country and leaders.

Alexander Hamilton blatantly and repeatedly betrayed his wife, Eliza, when she and Angelica went away for the summer and he stayed home to work. Hamilton was introduced to a woman who claimed her husband was not treating her right and Hamilton began an affair with her that became a “pastime” for him (Miranda). He showed no self-restraint because he could not say no even though he regretted the act and was aware he was cheating on his wife. He was not thinking about the repercussions it would cause until the woman’s husband threatened to tell Hamilton’s wife. Even after the affair was over, Alexander continued to destroy his relationship with his wife when he released his affair to the public in The Reynolds Pamphlet. He explained he “had frequent meetings with her. Most of them at [his] own house,” which showed he didn’t have the decency to have the affair somewhere besides his family’s home (Miranda). He didn’t think about Eliza and completely ignored the fact it was their home which represented family, trust, and faithfulness. Hamilton, sometimes a self-indulgent man, destroyed his reputation and the trust of his wife while trying to save his political reputation and clear his name. He realized the truth was going to get out sooner or later, so he took matters into his own hands and provided his own justifications for what he did. Eliza responded with her feelings of utter devastation and disbelief. She thought she would be enough for Alexander and wanted him to be able to settle down with their family and not be consumed with work. Eliza was shocked and stunned at first that the affair had happened and she was “searching and scanning for answers in every line, for some kind of sign” (Miranda). She burned all the letters he wrote her because she did not want anything to do with him or remember the memories they created. She developed an animosity towards Hamilton and said “I hope that you burn,” which demonstrated her anger and near- hatred for him (Miranda). Eliza was still recovering from the affair when her son, Phillip, died. In an accusatory, demanding tone, Eliza asked “Alexander, did you know” (Miranda)? Hamilton again betrayed Eliza by putting their son in danger and allowing him to risk his life for Alexander’s own reputation, although Hamilton did not expect it to end like it did. Hamilton thought he was helping Eliza by keeping her out of Phillip’s affairs but this only added to her devastation and feelings of betrayal.

Aaron Burr and Alexander Hamilton began their relationship as friends, but once Burr betrayed Hamilton the first time, it was a back and forth battle, with Burr the only survivor. When Burr replaced Hamilton’s father in-law in the senate Burr thought nothing of it, while Hamilton felt betrayed because Burr switched parties to win. Burr simply said “I changed parties to seize the opportunity I saw” because he wanted to have a position in the government (Miranda). He was trying to be more like Hamilton and be more of a “go-getter” although he still did not want to share his views. Burr had always wanted to be more involved in politics and saw his chance so he took it. This is how he thought Hamilton achieved so much: he saw an opportunity and seized it without stopping to analyze the situation first. Hamilton again felt betrayed by Burr when he was confronted by Burr, Jefferson, and Madison about money inconsistencies. They accused him of “embezzling our government funds” and stated, “I can almost see the headline, your career is done” which made Hamilton angry because they were threatening what he had worked so hard for (Miranda). Jefferson and Madison were happy to betray Hamilton because they were not very fond of him and it meant they would have one less opponent in government proceedings. However, this was not the biggest blow to Hamilton and Burr’s relationship because Burr knew if he spread the news of the affair, Hamilton could share a rumor about Burr’s married mistress and both Hamilton and Burr’s political and social lives would be affected. This confrontation ended up greatly effecting Hamilton’s life and caused him to have resentment towards Burr, so when the presidential election occurred, Hamilton endorsed Jefferson instead of Burr. He claimed it was because “Jefferson has beliefs. Burr has none,” but he was also getting back at Burr for indirectly ruining an important aspect of Hamilton’s life, his relationship with Eliza (Miranda). This was the last straw for Burr because he looked “back on where [he] failed, and in every place [he] checked, the only common thread ha[d] been [Hamilton’s] disrespect” (Miranda). He believed Hamilton was the reason he had not been as successful as he could have and began hating him for affecting his life so much. In this stage of his life, Burr was tired of always coming in second to Alexander and letting him overtake him in politics. This caused Burr to have an emotional awakening, making him want to fight instead of restraining himself like he had his entire life. Hamilton made another point to tell Burr he was not going to budge on his opinion about him because he wanted to defend his honor. This caused Burr to lose his patience with Hamilton, which he had been able to control until now, and propose a duel to settle all of the problems Burr and Hamilton had accumulated over the years. In a final act of betrayal, Aaron Burr killed Alexander Hamilton while Hamilton was going to “throw away [his] shot” (Miranda). Burr, who was full of anger, immediately realized his mistake. He stated “I was too young and blind to see. . . .

I should’ve known the world was wide enough for both Hamilton and me” (Miranda). After the act, Burr could not believe it had come to this end and he felt as if he betrayed Hamilton because of his own jealousy toward him.

Alexander Hamilton and Aaron Burr were not only betrayed by each other, but by larger forces. Hamilton was betrayed by time, and Burr by history. Throughout the play, Hamilton insisted “there’s a million things I haven’t done, but just you wait” and that he is “running out of time” which explains that he had so many thoughts and ideas he wanted the country to know, but he could not share them because he felt his time would be cut short (Miranda). Hamilton never wavered from his views, always stood his ground, and was never afraid of any backlash his ideas would create which ultimately led to his untimely death. He no longer was going to be able to do what he loved: share his opinions in an effort to create a better country, because time betrayed him. After he killed Hamilton, Burr realized that even though he “survived, [he] paid for it” because he was now the “villain in . . . history” (Miranda). When Burr’s name is mentioned, the main thing he is remembered for is killing one of the founding fathers who had so much more to accomplish. Burr’s character was “obliterate[d]” by history; he was not recognized because of his achievements, but because of his errors in life (Miranda).

Betrayal in Hamilton: An American Musical is one of the driving forces for certain characters and it causes them to do things they normally would not do. It leads to madness and excitement, heartbreak and forgiveness, envy and sadness. But most importantly, it makes them realize the things they need or want most, as when Eliza and Hamilton realized they needed each other to get through life, or when Burr realized, after he killed him, the country was better with Hamilton as one of its founding fathers. Acts of betrayal leave their marks on history and can change how one examines an individual’s story, as they did in this drama- filled, historical play, Hamilton: An American Musical.

Work Cited

Miranda, Lin-Manuel. Hamilton [sound Recording]: Original Broadway Cast Recording. New York, NY: Atlantic Recording Company, 2015.

Jennifer Carmona
English 1101
Professor Lamb
29 November 2016

Road to Ashville

In Ron Rash’s short story “The Trusty,” Rash describes the encounter of a young girl and a prison trusty. Lucy, the young girl, is portrayed as naïve and simple, but with Rash’s creative writing, he unfolds her character to demonstrate who she really is. To do this, Rash uses her marital issues and the arrival of the trusty, which give her a reason to escape. As the true manipulator, Lucy guides the trusty through what seems to be the road to Ashville. While in search for water, Sinkler the prison trusty arrives at a farmhouse, which happens to be Lucy’s home. To describe Lucy, Rash writes, “The woman who appeared in this doorway wore her hair in a similar tight bun and draped herself in the same sort of flour-cloth dress, but she looked to be in her mid-twenties” (Rash). Rash describes Lucy this way and hides her true persona behind her simple dress and bun. This fools Sinkler and prevents him from seeing her other side. Rash defies readers’ expectations by detailing what the characters thought of each other and wanted to believe instead of what was actually happening.

As a prisoner, most readers would have expected for him to be in a cell or chained. Sinkler on the other hand, was a trusty. As a trusty, he was given the ability to be free without the need of such incarceration, thus making the interaction between both him and Lucy a lot easier. Rash writes, “For the first time since she’d gone to fetch her husband, Lucy stepped off the porch and put some distance between her and the door. The shotgun and axe, too, which meant that she was starting to trust him at least a little” (Rash). Although this for a moment gave Sinkler the illusion she would willingly surrender to his demands, Lucy proves otherwise.

To further help his characterization of Lucy as a simple, and harmless girl, Rash includes an insight of Lucy’s marital issues. Lucy states, “I hate it here. He cusses me near every day and won’t let me go nowhere. When he gets drunk, he’ll load his shotgun and swear he’s going to shoot me” (Rash). After telling Sinkler this, he believes to have a greater chance of seducing her. In reality, she has already fooled him by allowing him to think she is weak and vulnerable and will lead him to Ashville.

Rash uses their escape to reveal her character and how she manipulates him. Here it becomes clear that her characterization did not describe who she really was. The author writes, “a branch snagged Lucy’s sleeve and ripped the frayed muslin. She surprised him with her profanity as she examined the torn cloth” (Rash). Before this, Sinkler was fooled into believing she yearned for a man, not once would he have expected of such act from her. In fact, Sinkler found her to be senseless and planned to have fun with her, “a hotel room and a bottle of bootleg whiskey and they’d have them a high old time. He could sneak out early morning while she slept” (Rash). But still, Sinkler fails to see this outburst as a wakeup call, and instead he continues to follow, not knowing she is manipulating him by guiding him in the same direction. Ron writes, “Near another ridge, they crossed a creek that was little more than a spring seep. They followed the ridge awhile, and then the trail widened and they moved back downhill and up again. Each rise and fall of the land looked like what had come before” (Rash). Her plan was never to help: she just tricked him into thinking so.

Even though they were not headed to Ashville, she ultimately reveals this when Sinkler needs water. Rash writes, “The water was so shallow that he had to lean over and steady himself with one hand,cupping the other to get a dozen leaky palmfuls in his mouth. He stood and brushed the damp sand off his hand and his knees” (Rash). As he reached for water he had to steady himself, thus his hand was embedded in the sand. Later, he kneels once again for water, but here realizes something strange, Ron writes, “as he pressed his palm into the sand, he saw that a handprint was already there beside it, his handprint” (Rash). Lucy led him to believe she was helping him, when in reality, it was all fake. Sinkler had already drunk water from that spring, but the confusion and tiredness of the travel had let him be fooled by who he thought was naïve and unintelligent. Lucy had the desire to be in control, and Sinkler happened to be the one she manipulated.

With Lucy’s simple way of dress and her youth, Rash created the appearance of an innocent and naïve girl. Rash shows that she used this misconception about herself to her benefit and was able to direct Sinkler how she wanted, not how he imagined. Lucy overall was a manipulator in the fact that her true intentions were not to help Sinkler escape. In fact, she was always one step ahead and did not allow Sinkler to control her.

Work Cited

Rash, Ron. “The Trusty.” The New Yorker, 2011, www.newyorker.com/ magazine/2011/05/23/the-trusty.