Hughes views on Happiness

After reading "I Thought It Was Tangiers I Wanted", Langston Hughes questions where happiness truly comes from. From what I got out of this poem is that you cannot travel to happiness. It isn't waiting for you. I believe it comes to you randomly, and you can get it with some luck. There is a famous saying that 'money can't buy happiness', however, some people think it can. So my question is, Does happiness only come from within, and if not, is it shallow of someone to try and seek happiness from worldly possessions?

Happiness is what you as a person feel content with. Hughes writes "Happiness is nowhere, Some old fool said." I feel that he is referring to material things not having the ability to make a person happy. No matter what new gadget we buy or vacation we take, humans always want more. In the long run, we don't know what will make us happy. Their are unhappy people who are poor, as well as unhappy rich people who are bored of getting everything they want. We don't always know what will make us happy. We may believe that there is a way to obtain absolute joy in our lives, but is there ever a point in life where we can feel 100% happy, or only 100% happy for that moment in time, such as receiving the newest phone or buying a cool car?

Deconstruction of the American literary canon? or of the idea "literary canon"?

I know it's not my day to post. I apologize in advance for the diversion. However, being that we have this blog, I am using it (if I may) as a reading journal.

African American Literary Canon- Who's in it?

There is an important question that needs to be asked in relation to the Af. Am. literary canon. I have been thinking about the expatriates and their native Black writers who stayed within their social sphere and composed their works. What defines who comprises the Af. Am. literary canon? During my educational career I have had the Western idea of the canon, which can be attributed to Harold Bloom’s writings. (I am very much not a supporter of all his writings). However, if we think about the idea of a canon, it is usually composed of writers who are from a specific location, are writing from that location, gain inspiration from their present soil, and are expressing (in some form or another) the social environment. So the English Romantics, for example, wrote poetry and prose that opposed the Enlightenment/Age of Reason forms of writing. They commented on issues such as abolitionism and the French Revolution. We considered them part of the English canon because the writers are English, are writing on English soil about English occurrences. (English, English, English… lol)

If many of you have always thought about categorical canons such as English, American, French, Af Am., etc., then what happens to those writers that we are considering in this course? Where do we place them? I don’t find it fair to place expatriates in with the Harlem Renaissance writers when some are not writing about the American experience (or aren't having a first-hand experience). Even the term “Harlem Renaissance” greatly contradicts the canon as a microcosmic portion of the American canon. The writings of the time did not only occur in Harlem as Dr. Davis point out in our first class. We have to include Chicago and even Paris. If so, then the American canon is not so American. In fact it is revolutionary that one literary period can deconstruct the idea of a literary canon. That expatriates are in a category themselves (which I have no name for) and I hope throughout the course I can place them somewhere. (This need and urge to place expatriates somewhere is nothing more then the American assimilation working at its best- the need to place people in categories, lol.)

I am open to criticism and opinions on this issue. Sorry Dr. Davis for drifting.

Fauset and Bennett (Fabre reading, continued)

So I realized after posting my reflections/questions on Cullen late last night that I had mistaken that chapter and the subsequent one on Fauset and Bennett as being two separate readings. There are common themes which occur throughout the sketches of all three individuals during their Parisian romps, but below are some additional reflections and questions posed in regards to the latter chapter on Fauset and Bennett specifically.

1. Jessie Fauset declined and offer to translate Rene Maran's Batouala as it's "crude" portrayal of blackness did not suit her personal sensibilities and sense of refinement. Yet she also notes her own writing felt delayed on account of being away from the "pressure" of American racism. What does this imply about Fauset's navigation of an African-American identity? Does class play a role? What other social factors are involved?

2. In Fauset's novel Comedy: American Style, the main character, Teresa, is an African-American woman living in France who eventually marries her white French professor. Towards the end of the novel, Teresa sees through "the alleged lack of prejudice among the French." In what ways may this have been true or untrue for Fauset as well?

3. Both Fauset and Bennett cling to the familiar in different ways during their experience in Paris. Is this a gendered commonality during this time period? Why or why not?

4. Gwendolyn Bennett is 23 years-old, and described more than once as fearful, less dependent, and nostalgic for home. Why is her experience in Paris so important to record and study? What does it tell us about this era for African-Americans? For women? For the educated elite?

5. Why did did Fauset and Bennett, respectively, decide to make the journey to France at all?

Commodity

We talked a bit last week about the view that those who traversed to London and Paris seemed to fall into a class of commodity. Whether it was of their own labeling or of those around them. As I was glancing at the reading I had the questions of how has that affected the stance of these ex-patriots today.

Do those that still travel to these countries pose themselves as commodities? being valued as Social, Societal, and escapist commodities. These ex-patriots seemed to step into or build their label and it has carried to this day in some form, be it for the better or worse.

But the question I have come up with is can todays ex-patriots or better yet worldly travelers use the tools at hand to change this perception of commodity?

Reflections on Countee Cullen

Incident

Once riding in old Baltimore,

Heart-filled, head-filled with glee,

I saw a Baltimorean

Keep looking straight at me.

Now I was eight and very small,

And he was no whit bigger,

And so I smiled, but he poked out

His tongue, and called me, "Nigger."

I saw the whole of Baltimore

From May until December;

Of all the things that happened there

That's all that I remember.

Countee Cullen was a notoriously secretive individual regarding the more personal details of his early life. Accounts of his childhood remain inconsistent - one article claimed he was born in Baltimore, another in Kentucky - and was raised by a grandmother who died sometime between the years 1908 and 1918. He was the adopted by the reverend of Harlem's largest church congregation of that era, Salem Methodist Episcopal Church.

I think this background is important in situating Cullen's identity, particularly in terms of racial consciousness, class, and moral beliefs. He grew up in the mecca of black artistic and literary movements. While he was canonical and more traditional in his appreciation of literature, he was rooted in a time and place of intentional blackness. As the beginning of the reading mentions, he was introduced to Paris through extensive travel with his father en route to the Holy Land, implying his family enjoyed a certain amount of class privilege. Also, I would argue his Protestant background plays a part in his short-lived marriage to Yolande DuBois, and related expectations and shortcomings around love and romantic relationships.

(I referenced the thepoetryfoundation.org, wikipedia, and english.illinois.edu for the biographical information in the first paragraph.)

Questions

1. The Martiniquan dance hall Bal Colonial is mentioned a few times as one of Cullen's favorite spots, even above attending the opera. What insight, if any, does this give us into Cullen's negotiation of an black identity in France?

2. What specific factors in Cullen's background could have contributed to his especially pronounced 'Francophilia'?

3. Why did Cullen's writing practice seem to taper off towards the 1930s?

4. What intra-communal dynamics stand out during Cullen's time in Paris?

5. How does social class play into Cullen's experience in Paris?

6. What conclusions can we draw around Cullen's two marriages and his personal journaling in regards to romantic love?

7. How do you relate to Zora Neale Hurston's commentary about Countee Cullen: "A Negro goes to white land to learn his trade! Ha!"

Discussion Questions on Gwendolyn Bennett's Poetry

On “Hatred” and “Advice”

I was on a random website reading about Gwendolyn Bennett when I came across an article that describes her poems as “word paintings.” I really liked that phrase, especially when I remembered that in addition to being a writer, she was also actually a painter. With that in mind…

• What are some examples from “Hatred” and “Advice” that you think (that is, if you agree!) demonstrate Bennett’s ability to create these “words paintings”?
• If we had to speculate, who might these two poems be aimed at?

On “Lines Written…”

• Why might she be at the grave of Alexandre Dumas, invoking his “great spirit”?
• What might Gwendolyn Bennett mean when she writes, “Oh, stir the lucid waters of thy sleep/And coin for me a tale/Of happy loves and gems and joyous limbs/And hearts where love is sweet!” ?

General Q’s

• In addition to “word paintings,” what are some additional ways we could describe her style of poetry (writing mechanics, use of language, descriptive phrases, etc)?
• What do you make of the rhythms and the repetitions throughout her works?
• How do her poems succeed at representing who she is as an African American woman abroad in the mid 1920s?

Discussion Questions on Gwendolyn Bennett's "Wedding Day" and "Tokens"

• As I read Gwendolyn Bennett’s “Wedding Day” I found myself thinking about the make up of Paul’s character quite a bit, particularly the things that seem to drive his violent tendencies. We know that Paul used to be a boxer in the States and that “When he was in the ring he was like a mad bull, especially if his opponent was a white man.” His athleticism and size, combined with his hatred of white people, allows him to dominate others physically, especially whites that he feels are racist towards African Americans. These factors considered, do we think that Paul was made violent by the racism he experienced in America (which at times surfaces throughout his experiences in France) or is he simply a violent man and the issues of racism present at the time exacerbate his violent character? Why or why not?

• Outwardly as well as physically, Paul is independent and very much in charge of himself. When we first meet Paul, the idea of having a woman in his life (whether for one night or forever) does not sit well with him at all. He is very aware of the fact that in Paris, “They’re all white.” He goes on to explain that although such women are suitable for some men, he himself wants nothing to do with them. All of this of course changes once he meets Mary. In fact, Paul seems to do a complete 180. Why is it so easy for Paul to fall for a girl like Mary (white, from the streets, etc)? Keep in mind that not even prison was able to change him. Do we think that at heart, he does not hate whites and only acts violently because it is the only thing he feels he can do to defend who he is (in other words, an eye for an eye) or has Mary truly succeeded at altering his ideas about whites? If you were Paul, would Mary running off contribute to reaffirming your previous ideas about whites? Why or why not?

• Paul and Jenks are both African American men living in Paris (Paul is certainly an expatriate, I am not 100% sure about Jenks but I get the feeling that he is, as well). Additional similarities include that they are both musicians, they are men that risk it all for the love of a (gold digging?) woman, and their anger certainly seems to gets the best of them at times (although in the case of Paul, people seem to like him anyway). Out of all of these similarities, I was most interested in exploring further the idea of the female as downfall. Do you guys think that Tollie is also a white female? Why or why not? I tried to search for clues but maybe there’s something I’m not seeing. Additionally, it seems that Jenks is truly changed at the end of "Tokens." Agree or disagree? What did we think of Jenks? Are Paul and Jenks as similar as I think they are? Was Jenks a likeable guy or did he only become one (if he becomes one at all) towards the end?

• Throughout “Tokens,” The Seine plays an important role in exposing a dark, intimate aspect of the world Jenks’ lives in. “The Seine…mute river of sorrows…grim concealer of forgotten secrets…endlessly flowing…touching the edges of life…moving purposely along with a grey disdain for the empty, foolish gaiety of Seraigne or the benign dignity of Merlin Hospital, high on the warm cliffs of Saint Cloud.” Why is the river described in this way and what is its significance throughout the story?

• What do “Wedding Day” and “Tokens” seem to be saying about the African American experience abroad? I personally got the impression that one of the things Bennett is trying to get across is the loneliness of being in Paris, yet the overall difficulty of being elsewhere, such as in America. Do you agree or disagree? Why or why not?