Prologue:
A First-Year Writing Journal
Volume 6: Spring 2014
2
Prologue
Prologue is an annual journal of academic essays designed to
showcase first-year writing at Denison and provide students with
the opportunity to have their works published, usually for the
first time. The selection process began with many first-year
students submitting their essays anonymously which were
carefully reviewed by members of the Editorial Board,
comprised of eight members of the Writing Center staff. Five
pieces were selected for publication, and one of the Writing
Center consultants on the editorial board reviewed one of the
selected essays and met with its author to discuss how the paper
could be improved. These sessions with the authors and the
strengths of each essay are surveyed in the commentaries
following each essay.
The Prologue Editorial Board, 2013-2014
Param Ajmera ‘14
Hannah Bersee ‘16
Olivia Davidson ‘14
Kelsey Hagarman ‘15
Julia McDaniel ‘16
Ali Richardson ‘’16
Emily Smith ‘15
Amy Yoder ‘14
3
Table of Contents
Why Exclusion Leads to Oppression………………………….4
Kareha Agesa
“Women Without Men” versus “Men Without Women”: The
Contrast Between Unmarried Men and Unmarried Women in
Cold War American Society…………………………………..11
Rachael Barrett
Critical Essay: Zora Neale Hurston’s What White Publishers
Won’t Print in Comparison to the Television Shows “Good
Times” and “The Cosby Show”………………………………24
Kalyn Dunkins
Eliminative Materialism: An Artistic Lens…………………..34
Malorie Eisenbrei
H.G. Wells’ The Time Machine: Beyond Science and Fiction
………………………………………………………………..43
Allie Vugrincic
4
Why Exclusion Leads to Oppression
By Kareha Agesa
Early intellectuals such as Thomas Jefferson and Catherine Beecher placed an importance
on education because they believed it would strengthen the new nation and engender happiness
throughout its people. Though these intellectuals argued for education, they oftentimes argued
solely for the education of middle class white men and rarely, if ever, middle class white women.
The choice to leave out women and people of color was a detrimental flaw in the plans of the
early intellectuals. The ideas of Jefferson and Beecher matter as we consider the history of US
education because flaws in the ideas of these thinkers have developed into stereotypes and
hardships prevalent today. Their ideas for education have been molded into our current education
system, and modern day problems such as lower graduation rates and income levels among
people of color and a gender wage gap favoring men originate from the education plans of the
early intellectuals privileging solely white men.
The philosophies of Founding Father Thomas Jefferson centered on happiness. Jefferson
believed that education was an imperative means for the pursuit of happiness and placed high
value on the pursuit of knowledge. One of Jefferson’s goals was to remove the “artificial
aristocracy” made up of those placed in power solely because of their wealth and birth status and
allow for a natural aristocracy, consisting of those with the virtue and talent to lead the new
nation.1 Jefferson created a plan for education that widened the pool from which the nation’s
leaders could be chosen. In his plan, Jefferson divided the schooling system into four distinct
tiers that would ultimately give rise to men with the merit and skill level to lead the nation.2
1
Guy Senese, Steve Tozer, and Paul C. Violas, School and Society: Historical and Contemporary Perspectives, 7th
ed. (New York: McGraw Hill, 2013), 33-36. 2
Ibid., 40.
5
Jefferson’s plan called for a republic based on meritocracy, in which only those who
demonstrated the appropriate amount of merit could occupy influential positions in the nation.3
Though Jefferson’s plan for education and building the new nation was ideal for middle
class white men of his time, it proved disadvantageous for women and people of color. In his
plan, Jefferson accounted for a woman’s education only up until elementary school (the first tier
in his four tier plan) and viewed a woman solely as a “homemaker, bearer of children, and
delight to her husband.”4 Jefferson saw no purpose for a woman’s education past elementary
school and reduced her potential for success to that of the household economy. Along with his
disregard for the educational advancement of women, Jefferson failed to include slaves in his
plan for education. Though Jefferson’s views on the humanity of slaves are ambiguous, refusing
to include them in his legislative proposals on education shows his dehumanizing sentiments
toward them.5
Remnants of Jefferson’s misguided exclusion of women and slaves in the entirety of his
education plan can be traced throughout US education history. Traditionally, people of color
have been subjected to mediocre education compared to that of white people, which has resulted
in both lower graduation rates and lower income levels among people of color. Further, though
women currently have the potential to reach levels of economic success equal to those of men,
there exists a gender wage gap favoring men and a societal expectation that a woman’s long-term
goal should be to get married and start a family. Oppressive issues such as these show modern
day society’s internalization of Jefferson’s ideas. Though there are current examples of affluent
people of color and women who have acquired influential positions in society, most women and
people of color must work considerably harder than white men to achieve these roles. Jefferson’s
3
Ibid., 40.
Ibid., 43.
5
Ibid., 42-44. 4
6
exclusion of women and people of color from his plan for education has created a barrier that
favors white men to reach academic and socioeconomic success.
Similar to Thomas Jefferson, Catherine Beecher valued happiness and recognized that
education prepares men to assume the important duties of society. Additionally, Beecher
believed that collegiate and professional institutions must be established in order to give a proper
education to these influential men. From this education, men will have “well-disciplined and
well-informed minds,” better allowing them to successfully hold their positions and strengthen
the nation.6 According to Beecher, the absence of education would result in “desultory,
deficient” men unfit for success in their chosen professions.7
Unlike Jefferson, Beecher realized the important role that women played in society.
Though Beecher believed that equating the sexes resulted in “weak men and disorderly women,”
she also believed that women were imperative to the prosperity of a nation.8 Beecher claimed
that “the moral and intellectual character of the young” is molded by the female mind, so women
must have a vital role in the education system.9 According to Beecher, women deserved an
education because their teachings formed the character and morals of their sons, and their sons
grew into the nation’s prominent figures. Beecher’s belief that if “the women of a country be
made virtuous and intelligent…the men will certainly be the same” shows the importance she
placed on a woman’s education.10
Though Beecher recognized the vital role a woman’s education played in the prosperity
of the nation, she also limited a woman’s capabilities to that of a household laborer. According to
Beecher, “the stimulation of the intellect [of a woman] should be very much reduced,” and a
6
Catherine E. Beecher, Treatise on Domestic Economy (Boston: T.H. Webb, & Co., 1842), 51.
Ibid., 51.
8
Ibid., 28.
9
Ibid., 37.
10
Ibid., 37. 7
7
woman’s schooling should focus on bettering her “physical development” and not her
intellectual development, so as to preserve her “beauty and youthfulness.”11 Further, women are
to be sent to school only after the age of six, and the main goal of a woman’s education should
be to gain “a thorough practical knowledge of all kinds of domestic employments.”12 Though
women are to receive enough schooling to enable them to guide their sons, most of a woman’s
time should be spent in the “Domestic Economy.”13 Beecher also believed that a woman should
be honored by her role as a household labor worker. Beecher’s goal was to lessen the stigma that
labor is degrading and have women realize that their lack of a proper education is a gift.14 The
subservient and oppressive mentality Beecher expected of women in her ideas for education
contributed to the inequality women have faced throughout US education history. Her belief that
women should be confined to domestic work has perpetuated the notion that women cannot
exceed outside of household labor and fed into a stereotype that women have struggled to
overcome for years.
Many early intellectuals excluded both women and people of color in their ideal
education systems, and this exclusion has lead to the many socioeconomic and academic
hardships for both groups of people. Examining US education history shows that traditionally,
people of color have been denied the same rights to education as white people. This has limited
the potential for educational and material success for people of color, particularly women of
color, throughout history and even today. Moreover, current scholarships like the Posse
Scholarship and other programs aimed at assisting underrepresented populations in achieving
academic success show modern day society’s compensation for the early intellectuals neglecting
11
Ibid., 48; Ibid., 41.
Ibid., 49.
13
Ibid., 50.
14
Ibid., 61.
12
8
to include people of color in their education plans. Furthermore, the idea that women belong
solely in the domestic sphere has lead to stereotypes and expectations of women that limit them
to submissive roles. Women that do overcome these degrading and limiting stereotypes are often
inappropriately labeled and have to work to prove their womanhood, a ridiculous phenomenon.
Had the early intellectuals included all people in their plans for education, people of color and
women may have had the chance to earn successful positions in life with an ease parallel to that
of white men.
9
Works Cited
Beecher, Catherine E. Treatise on Domestic Economy. Boston: T.H. Webb, & Co., 1842.
Senese, Guy, Steve Tozer, Paul C. Violas. School and Society: Historical and Contemporary
Perspectives, 7th ed. New York: McGraw Hill, 2013.
10
Commentary
Kareha Agesa’s paper was chosen to be included in this year’s edition of Prologue for a number
of reasons that underscore her developing potential as a writer and a scholar. Right off the bat, in
her very first paragraph, Kareha informs the reader of the key issues that her paper investigates and she doesn’t shy away from highlighting the deficiencies in the perspectives of those storied
individuals who laid the foundations of the U.S. public education system. Presenting an informed
criticism of Thomas Jefferson and Catherine Beecher is no easy task, especially for someone just
beginning to come to terms with the significantly higher expectations that writing in the
undergraduate level commands, but Kareha explicates her views with aplomb. She acknowledges
the advances made by Jefferson and Beecher, but she also sheds light on how their views were
biased along racial and gendered lines. What I loved the most about Kareha’s paper was the
manner in which she tied her arguments together towards the end of the paper and told the reader
what strides have been made to overcome the limitations that accompanied Jefferson’s and
Beecher’s perspectives. Writing an effective conclusion is a matter that most first-year students
have difficulties with, but Kareha’s paper is a glowing example of rational thinking effectively
communicated.
--Param Ajmera, Writing Center Consultant
11
“Women Without Men” versus “Men Without Women”: The
Contrast Between Unmarried Men and Unmarried Women in Cold
War American Society
By Rachael Barrett
In its July 5, 1960 issue, Look magazine published an article entitled “Women Without
Men.” The author of the article, Eleanor Harris, was curious about the growing number of single
American women because they defied cultural expectations of marriage. She wondered how they
felt about unmarried life, why they could not or would not get married, and what they were doing
to change “their manless lot.”15 So many readers responded to “Women Without Men” that
Harris wrote a follow-up article for the November 22, 1960 issue, entitled “Men Without
Women,” about America’s unmarried men. In Harris’s view, women were much more desperate
to get married than men, because women were “likely to get stranded if they waited too long to
get married, but it was ‘never too late’ for men.”16 Harris used her articles about people who did
not fit the gender role stereotypes of Cold War American society in order to help bolster those
stereotypes by portraying the dissenters as abnormal.
As Nancy Cott demonstrated, the idea of marriage as superior to single life was present at
the time of the founding fathers and continued even into the post-World War II period.17 Even
more so than before, after WWII Americans as a society viewed marriage as the only way that
adults could lead happy, fulfilled lives. This perception was even truer for women than for men,
because while men could achieve fulfillment through their work, women could not because at
that time, society looked down upon women who had careers. It saw career women as unnatural,
15
Harris, Eleanor. “‘Women Without Men’: The Pros and Cons of a ‘Man-Free Life.’” Look
Magazine, July 5, 1960, 1. 16
Harris, Eleanor. “‘Men Without Women’: Look Magazine Offers a Guide to the Unmarried
Man.” Look Magazine, November 22, 1960, 1. 17
Cott, Nancy F. Public Vows: A History of Marriage and the Nation. Cambridge, MA: Harvard
University Press, 2000, 9.
12
unfeminine, and as futilely seeking fulfillment in an area that could offer them none.18 Societal
convention dictated that a woman’s place was in the home; few people publicly denounced this
perception until Betty Friedan published The Feminine Mystique in 1963.19 However, the mere
fact that the writers at Look decided to write a piece about the lives of unmarried men and
women signified that discussion on the subject of marriage was already taking place; the writers
would not have seen a need to write about something undisputed. Harris’s articles portrayed both
the current ideas about marriage as well as the changes to those ideas. Eleanor Harris’s two Look
magazine articles, “Women Without Men” and “Men Without Women,” are historically valuable
because they provide examples of the perceptions that Cold War American society had about
marriage, the double standard that existed in regards to gender and marriage at that time, and the
changes that were occurring in people’s—especially women’s—ideas about marriage.
The articles demonstrate that Cold War American society saw marriage as the only way
for both men and women to be happy or successful. Very early in “Women Without Men,”
Harris implied that unmarried women’s “lack of steady male companionship” was a problem that
they needed to fix.20 Harris, whose views on the subject tallied with societal conventions, was
suspicious of unmarried people.21 The general population viewed the unmarried state as a
problem in part because they were worried about how soldiers who had recently returned from
WWII were readjusting to civilian life. They perceived marriage as a cultural norm and therefore
18
May, Elaine Tyler. Homeward Bound: American Families in the Cold War Era. New York:
Basic Books, 1988, 88-9. 19
Linden-Ward, Blanche and Carol Hurd Green, American Women in the 1960s: Changing the
Future. New York: Twayne Publishers, 1993, 146. 20
Harris, “Men Without Women,” 1; Harris, “Women Without Men,” 1.
21
Rosen, Ruth. The World Split Open: How the Modern Women's Movement Changed America.
New York: Viking, 2000, 12.
13
assumed that if the returning soldiers were not getting married, they were readjusting poorly.22 In
addition, in Cold War America, society considered unmarried people potential communists,
although anyone who did not follow cultural norms during the Cold War was under this same
suspicion.23 For these reasons, many young people felt pressured to get married. They may not
have thought it would lead to happiness, but they assumed that it would help them avoid extreme
unhappiness. Friedan supplied some examples of this way of thinking in The Feminine Mystique,
when she asked high school and college girls about their thoughts on marriage. Many reported
that they did not want to grow up, because they were afraid of becoming unhappy housewives
like their mothers. Some also gave up their hobbies, like writing poetry, even if they were
talented, because they knew that in order to be socially accepted, they had to show interest in
boys.24 Society told girls and women from a young age that their primary occupation should be
that of a housewife.
In an effort to persuade her readers that her opinions about unmarried men and women
were valid, Harris interviewed doctors and cited scientific findings which her many of her
readers would have known about and accepted as true. Faced with the threat of nuclear war
unless American technology surpassed Soviet technology, Americans placed much of their hope
in science. One man Harris interviewed said that he was “indoctrinated in college with the
scientific method of solving problems” and “found that method was applicable in almost every
area of life.”25 One way in which Harris appealed to this fascination with science was by citing
Dr. Alfred Kinsey, who conducted studies in the late 1940s and early 50s about American
22
May, Homeward Bound, 88.
23
Rosen, The World Split Open, 16; Dicker, Rory Cooke. A History of U.S. Feminisms.
Berkeley, CA: Seal Press, 2008, 73.
24
Friedan, Betty. The Feminine Mystique. London: Victor Gollancz, 1963, 73.
25
Harris, “Men Without Women,” 3.
14
sexuality. Harris did not state this in her articles; she may have assumed that her readers were
familiar with him and his work, because his Sexual Behavior in the Human Male and Sexual
Behavior in the Human Female were bestsellers at the time she was writing.26 Kinsey argued that
sexuality, like many other aspects of life during the Cold War, such as political liberalism,
needed to be contained. According to Kinsey’s studies, many people felt that female sexuality
had to be restrained, as they thought had become uncontrollable during WWII due to the
perceived increasing frequency of extramarital affairs.27 Harris agreed with Kinsey’s findings
and, in her articles, tried to convince her readers of their validity.
In addition, Harris, like Cold War society in general, portrayed working women as an
anomaly. She said that: “occasionally, a manless woman has the foresight to take fresh stock of
herself” and “decides to quit marking time in a job of little interest and to find—or invent—work
that will absorb her.”28 These women “often” found “fascinating, self-fulfilling careers,” but
Harris maintained that only a few women stopped searching for a spouse long enough to
reevaluate their lives.29 Again, Harris’s description of women mirrored that of Cold War
American society in general. In the 1950s and early 60s, the housewife was an American
“cultural icon.” Contrary to this mode of thought, however, many married women admired their
working counterparts, although they themselves felt they had to get married because “in real life
women who had careers had no support from the culture.”30 Society considered those who did
not conform to the housewife standard unfeminine, and did not publicize examples of women
26
Scanlon, Jennifer. Bad Girls Go Everywhere: The Life of Helen Gurley Brown. New
York: Oxford University Press, 2009, 70.
27
May, Homeward Bound, 101; Scanlon, Bad Girls Go Everywhere, 71.
28
Harris, “Women Without Men,” 3.
29
Harris, “Women Without Men,” 3.
30
May, Homeward Bound, 54; Linden-Ward and Hurd Green, American Women in the 1960s,
71.
15
who did not fit the mold.31 In order to uphold cultural norms, in “Women Without Men” Harris
also tried to deemphasize the amount of women present in the workforce in 1960.
The articles provide an example of the double standard that operated in regards to
marriage and sexuality for men and women of the 1950s and early 60s. Harris made a point of
discussing the sex lives of unmarried men but not those of unmarried women, a disparity that
reflected the societal standard that men were allowed to have sex outside of marriage while
women were not. She posed the question of “what… unattached men do about sex”; however,
she did not mention what unmarried women “do about sex,” even though she informed her
readers that women were interested in men and marriage for their entire lives.32 Similarly, during
WWII, people viewed men’s extramarital affairs as necessary, while they viewed women’s
extramarital affairs as tantamount to treason. Later on, Cold War society expected men to have
sexual experience before marriage, but expected women to remain virgins. In addition, Cold War
society deemed premarital sex acceptable for men under any circumstances, but only acceptable
for women if they were in love or engaged to be married.33 Harris’s comment that men needed to
“do something about sex,” while women did not was another of her attempts to promote societal
norms.
Harris also discussed men’s and women’s different roles in the search for a spouse, which
revealed even more about the double standard at that time. In her articles, Harris adopted the
conventional viewpoint that women were the actors in the search for a spouse, while men were
much more passive. She devoted several paragraphs in “Women Without Men” to describing the
various ways in which women searched for husbands: they changed jobs, moved away from
31
Rosen, The World Split Open, 39.
32
Harris, “Men Without Women,” 3; Harris, “Women Without Men,” 1.
33
Gatlin, Rochelle. American Women Since 1945. Jackson, MS: University Press of Mississippi,
1987, 3; May, Homeward Bound, 122; Gatlin, American Women Since 1945, 55.
16
home, went to church, played sports, and signed up for political clubs, all in the effort to meet
men. She also said that “even strangers assume that a man who goes to a movie or a prize fight
alone does so through choice,” although they assumed that women did those things in order to
meet men.34 The way in which Harris depicted both men’s and women’s actions in the search for
a spouse reflected the cultural norms of the time. These norms often defined women in terms of
men, by their status as wives and mothers, but defined men in terms of the work they did. Single
women were thus identity-less unless they were married, while men had identity before, during,
and after marriage.35
Another way in which Harris displayed the double standard was by listing the physical
and psychological benefits of marriage for men, but not discussing the effect of marriage on
women’s health. Marriage benefitted men because in marriage, men had someone to take care of
them. However, marriage did not benefit women in the same manner; Harris reported that “many
married women” sought psychiatric help, but she did not indicate that married men were seeing
psychiatrists as well.36 While men thrived in marriage, women were much more likely to
sacrifice and suffer. One participant in the Kelly Longitudinal Study, a twenty-year study of
white, middle-class, New England married couples that ended in 1954, listed all the sacrifices
she had made for her marriage. These included “all… close relationships… personal freedom,
what seemed to contribute to [her] personality, financial independence, goals [and] personal
achievements.” Historian Elaine Tyler May, who read this woman’s comments, asserted that the
woman was rebelling against society’s expectations for women because she felt that these
34
Harris, “Women Without Men,” 3-4; Harris, “Men Without Women,” 2.
35
Brown, Helen Gurley. Sex and the Single Girl. New York: B. Geis Associates, 1962, 89. 36
Harris, “Women Without Men,” 3; Harris, “Men Without Women,” 4.
17
expectations oppressed her.37 In The Feminine Mystique, Friedan argued that “the feminine
mystique [made] the housewife-mothers, who never had a chance to be anything else, the model
for all women… It simply [made] certain concrete, finite, domestic aspects of feminine
existence… into… a pattern by which all women must live.” 38 Marriage, she said, made women
more childish by limiting their options in life, as the woman in the study’s options were limited,
so that the only culturally-sanctioned path open to them was that of a housewife. In that way,
marriage benefitted men both physically and psychologically, while it impeded women’s
psychological development.
Harris’s articles demonstrate that by 1960, some women had begun to challenge society’s
idea that they needed to be married to be happy. Harris maintained that some men and women
consciously decided not to get married, despite social pressure to do so.39 Postwar society placed
“an emphasis on the nuclear family at the expense of other relatives and friends, loss of personal
freedom, financial independence, ‘goals,’ and ‘personal achievements,’” especially for women.40
One reason that unmarried women outnumbered unmarried men when Harris was writing may
have been because marriage in the Cold War era placed more stress upon and required more
sacrifices from women than men. As shown by the fact that Harris wrote “Women Without Men”
before “Men Without Women,” society “considered marriage more important for women” and
therefore, people were more curious as to why women would remain single than why men
would.41 At the time Harris was writing, a growing number of women were dissatisfied with
their lives as mothers and housewives. One psychiatrist Harris quoted remarked that his single
37
May, Homeward Bound, 34-5.
38
Friedan, The Feminine Mystique, 43.
39
Harris, “Women Without Men,” 2.
40
May, Homeward Bound, 34.
41
Gatlin, American Women Since 1945, 57.
18
women patients were happier than those who were married.42 However, many married women
failed to recognize their individual discontent as part of a problem in larger society.43
By providing examples of single women who were happy without men, Harris showed
that some women were rejecting society’s expectation for women to marry; however, it was not
until after Harris published her articles that women began to see these isolated examples as
indicative of a larger societal trend. The idea that women could be independent and make
decisions regardless of what men thought was not formally introduced until after Harris wrote,
but the fact that she cited examples of women who made those types of decisions shows that the
ideas were present and gaining popularity by 1960, even if they were not formally articulated
yet.44 In The Feminine Mystique, Friedan argued that women’s magazines of the Cold War era
portrayed women as “young and frivolous, almost childlike; gaily content in a world of bedroom
and kitchen, sex, babies, and home” and said that “the only goal a woman is permitted is the
pursuit of a man.”45 However, by 1963, both Friedan in The Feminine Mystique and Helen
Gurley Brown in Sex and the Single Girl had argued that women could and should make their
own choices, without relying on men. Brown appealed to conventional gender roles and told her
single, working class audience that men were almost required for happiness and fulfillment, but
marriage was not—a revolutionary claim for 1962. In Brown’s view, the women who balanced
their love lives with careers and hobbies would be the most fulfilled.46 Friedan, in contrast, wrote
for suburban housewives, so she discussed marriage and motherhood, but not romance per se.
She said that “The only way for a woman… to find herself, to know herself as a person, is by
42
Harris, “Women Without Men,” 3.
43
Friedan, The Feminine Mystique, 33.
44
Linden-Ward and Green, American Women in the 1960s, 146.
45
Friedan, The Feminine Mystique, 36.
46
Scanlon, Bad Girls Go Everywhere, 86; Brown, Sex and the Single Girl, 4, 89.
19
creative work of her own,” and by finding a job that would challenge her intellectually, in a way
that housework did not.47 Even though Harris wrote before Brown and Friedan, she provided
examples of women’s discontent with married life, such as that of a divorced woman who stated
that she was much happier and much more independent than she had been when she was
married.48 In this way, Harris provided evidence that dissent from the societal standard of
marriage as the route to happiness was present before it became popular.
Harris’s articles also allowed readers to see beyond the more prevalent image of
contented housewives and unfulfilled single women. Friedan commented that through Harris’s
examples of discontented married women and happy single women, “the door of all those pretty
suburban houses opened a crack to permit a glimpse of uncounted thousands of American
housewives who suffered alone.”49 That “crack” eventually widened, and throughout the
women’s movement of the 1960s, the “housewives” had new opportunities to change their ways
of thinking. Although Harris and many others tried to uphold the societal standards of the early
Cold War era, by 1973, polls suggested that many Americans no longer considered marriage the
only path to happiness and fulfillment for men or women. At that point, marriage was merely one
of several lifestyles from which men and women could choose. In addition, in a 1986 poll, only
twenty-six percent of women “cited being a wife and mother as ‘one of the best parts of being a
woman.’” The divorce rate in 1978 was double that of 1965—more than double that of 1960,
when Harris wrote. By the late 1970s and 80s, then, society in general had become much more
accepting of people who chose not to get married.50
47
Friedan, The Feminine Mystique, 344.
48
Harris, “Women Without Men,” 3.
49
Friedan, The Feminine Mystique, 25.
50
Rosen, The World Split Open, 314, 337.
20
Eleanor Harris’s two Look magazine articles, “Women Without Men” and “Men Without
Women,” are historically valuable because they give historians insight into Cold War American
society’s thoughts on marriage, the double standard that was present during that time, and the
ways in which attitudes about marriage were changing by 1960. When Harris wrote, society
viewed marriage as the only path to happiness and fulfillment for both men and women, but
especially for women. Many viewed the state of being single as a problem that needed to be
fixed. Some women, however, rebelled against this way of thinking and led full lives without
men. They also rejected the societal double standard, which dictated that single women should
actively seek out husbands yet remain virgins until marriage. The idea that women could and
should make their own decisions became much more widespread after the publication of Sex and
the Single Girl in 1962 and The Feminine Mystique in 1963, but Harris’s articles portrayed
discontent among American women prior to that, and thus foreshadowed the women’s
movement of the 1960s.
21
Bibliography of Works Consulted
Brown, Helen Gurley. Sex and the Single Girl. New York: B. Geis Associates, 1962.
Coontz, Stephanie. The Way We Never Were: American Families and the Nostalgia Trap. New
York: Basic Books, 1992.
Cott, Nancy F. Public Vows: A History of Marriage and the Nation. Cambridge, MA: Harvard
University Press, 2000.
Dicker, Rory Cooke. A History of U.S. Feminisms. Berkeley, CA: Seal Press, 2008.
Friedan, Betty. The Feminine Mystique. London: Victor Gollancz, 1963.
Gatlin, Rochelle. American Women Since 1945. Jackson, MS: University Press of Mississippi,
1987.
Harris, Eleanor. "'Men Without Women': Look Magazine Offers a Guide to the Unmarried Man."
Look Magazine, November 22, 1960, 124-30.
———. "'Women Without Men': The Pros and Cons of a 'Man-Free Life.'" Look Magazine, July
5, 1960, 43-46.
Hillman, Betty Luther. "'The Clothes I Wear Help Me to Know My Own Power': The Politics of
Gender Presentation in the Era of Women's Liberation." Frontiers: A Journal of Women
Studies 34, no. 2 (2013): 155-85. Accessed November 10, 2013. Academic Search
Premier (90100345).
Horowitz, Daniel. Betty Friedan and the Making of The Feminine Mystique: The American Left,
the Cold War, and Modern Feminism. Amherst, MA: University of Massachusetts Press,
1998.
Kinsey, Alfred C., Wardell R. Pomeroy, and Clyde E. Martin. "Sexual Behavior in the Human
Male." American Journal of Public Health 93, no. 6 (June 2003): 894-98.
Laughlin, Kathleen A., and Jacqueline L. Castledine, eds. Breaking the Wave: Women, Their
Organizations, and Feminism, 1945-1985. New York: Routledge, 2011.
Linden-Ward, Blanche, and Carol Hurd Green. American Women in the 1960s: Changing the
Future. New York: Twayne Publishers, 1993.
May, Elaine Tyler. Homeward Bound: American Families in the Cold War Era. New York:
Basic Books, 1988.
Mikell, Gwendolyn, Shamita Das Dasgupta, Valentine M. Moghadam, and Sian Hawthorne.
"Feminism." In Encyclopedia of Sex and Gender, edited by Fedwa Malti-Douglas, 531-
22
42. Vol. 2. Detroit: Macmillan Reference USA, 2007. Accessed November 10, 2013.
Gale Virtual Reference Library.
Rosen, Ruth. The World Split Open: How the Modern Women's Movement Changed America.
New York: Viking, 2000.
Ryan, Barbara. Feminism and the Women's Movement: Dynamics of Change in Social
Movement, Ideology, and Activism. New York: Routledge, 1992.
23
Commentary
In her paper, “Women Without Men” versus “Men Without Women”: The Contrast Between
Unmarried Men and Unmarried Women in Cold War American Society,” Rachael Barrett
addresses the complex issue of the gender-based double standard surrounding the role of
marriage in an individual’s life with remarkably clarity and poise. Her introduction and thesis
make clear through what lens she intends to approach this multifaceted topic, and she proceeds to
analyze the two magazine articles to which she directs her primary focus while simultaneously
placing them in conversation with other relevant contemporary sources, such as Betty Freidan’s
The Feminine Mystique. Rachael avoids overgeneralizations and categorical statements by
grounding her analysis in the articles themselves, and she deftly accounts for shifting attitudes
surround marriage and gender roles throughout the Cold War Era. Rachael’s argument that
Eleanor Harris’s articles are historically significant is extremely convincing and well-reasoned.
She is also adept at identifying the elements of Harris’s articles which both espouse and
challenge cultural norms. Ultimately, this essay is an excellent example of tackling a broad topic
through the use of a specific lens, and it is incredibly successful in fulfilling this objective.
-Emily Smith, Writing Center Consultant
24
Critical Essay: Zora Neale Hurtson’s What White Publishers Won’t
Print in Comparison to the Television Shows “Good Times” and
“The Cosby Show”
By Kalyn Dunkins
In the essay What White Publishers Won’t Print by Zora Neale Hurston, expressions of
both concern and subtle anger are presented over the fact that White publishers will only print
Black literature if it is based in the content of racial stereotypes, struggle, and tension of some
kind. This essay will bring light to why certain media would have been more or less likely
accepted during her time period (the Harlem Renaissance) due to the amount of impoverishment
expressed or lack thereof.
Two popular television shows of the 20th Century, both televised after Hurston’s essay
was written (Good Times and The Cosby Show), have a Black family as the main characters.
These two families, however, differ in how they are represented on television as far as the setting
in which the family lives goes, the financial background of the family, the expressed dialect used
in each family, and so forth. So, although both families are Black, the details previously listed
are crucial in determining whether or not these shows would have been allowed for publication if
they were written around the time Hurston published her essay.
Hurston herself is the author of the famous novel Their Eyes Were Watching God. Within
that novel, there are clear demonstrations of racial bias, tension, and struggle throughout the
chapters with most of the main characters presented. The main character, Janie, has features that
aren’t particularly considered “Black” (her flowing hair and perfect skin) and a woman she meets
shows favor to her over other women because of this. Also, towards the end of the novel after a
hurricane occurs, many people must be buried. The buriers are instructed to put the bodies of
white people in nice wooden boxes and to only throw the bodies of black people in whatever
25
hole they can dig. Some may argue that she is being hypocritical in her essay What White
Publishers Won’t Print because she herself wrote about the exact things she was arguing against,
or it can also be argued that her essay was a cry for change so that she wouldn’t have to present
such racial tensions in her novels just to get them published.
Good Times, was first televised in 1974. The show consists of a family of five, who
reside in a small projects apartment in Chicago: Florida Evans and James Evans, Sr., the heads of
the household, along with their three children James “J.J.” Evans, Jr., Michael Evans, and
Thelma Evans. This show was a spin-off of the previous sitcom Maude, where Florida played a
house maid for a white family and “James” (then known as Henry) played a firefighter, both still
married, but living in New York. Florida quits her job as a maid because Henry gets a raise and
they both move to Chicago, thus presenting Good Times, where Henry is now known as James.
Scenarios like the one previously described seem unlikely, in the sense that many would not
expect that a man of color would get a raise and have the ability to move on to “better” life so
quickly if his lifestyle wasn’t very well financially developed to begin with. This idea, during
Hurston’s time period, would have to have been edited or downplayed in order for it to seem
believable enough for life in that era.
At the start of Good Times, the show was primarily based on showing family struggles
but the ability to make it through these struggles with uses of humor. However, as the show
progressed, more and more of the comical aspect turned into mockery of the Black community as
a whole which eventually caused cancellation of the show in 1979 after six consecutive seasons,
primarily due to complaints of producers and the cast themselves (Spadoni). Contrastingly, if
these comical remarks were to be continuously and repetitively made during Hurston’s time
period, it is arguable that there would not have been a problem with them based on the belief at
26
the time that this sort of presentation of Black people and their community was more “relatable”
as far as the majority of the non-Black general public was concerned.
One of the episodes entitled “The Family Gun” features the Evans family having to
ensure security of their home due to Florida’s purse being stolen, along with other crimes that
have been accumulatively committed throughout the projects (Lear). At one point, J.J. has to
unlock their front door in order to let Willona, Florida’s best friend, into the apartment. The door
consists of six extra locks apart from the one built-in with the door to emphasize the need for
security within the home. Although the audience laughs hysterically as J.J. unlocks the door,
mind you, with a goofy grin planted across his face, the humor of the matter draws away the
seriousness of it. The humor placed in the episode can in a way only encourage Whites not to
care since it appears that Blacks don’t really care about the issue either.
Further along within the episode, Willona and Florida make an imaginary check-list of
the things they need before going down to the laundry room. One of these items is a police
whistle. Michael comments, “What’s the use? You whistle and the police don’t come! … All
those locks on the door or not being able to go down to the laundry room without protection?
This is no way to live” (Lear). Typically, a white family of that era wouldn’t have to have taken
such drastic measures to keep themselves protected. This scene in the episode magnifies how
crime between Blacks was more likely to be frowned upon, or more commonly broadcasted in
negative light of the race as a whole, though I’m sure crimes between Whites occurred similarly.
Hurston’s argument is that the noted discrimination between Whites’ ways of living and Blacks’
has caused the two groups to be looked at with bias, favor given towards Whites. Because of this
bias, it is expected for Blacks to have to deal with the burden of having to overprotect themselves
due to the culture that Whites believe they have created for and by Blacks themselves.
27
If these scenes were presented during Hurston’s time period, reviewers would probably
give the author the “proper” praise and accolades for portraying the quote-unquote common
Black struggle within impoverished Black communities in such an artistic matter. Readers
would, apparently, love to hear more about the struggle of the family rather than the support and
encouragement displayed in other episodes. J.J. is also a student at an art institute and Thelma is
pursuing a career in dance and singing. These attributes would most likely be cut out of a novel
if presented during Hurston’s time period because of the quote-unquote unrealistic positivity that
is shown in the children’s upbringing.
The Cosby Show, contrastingly, isn’t very similar to Good Times at all, besides the fact
that both families are Black. The Huxtables are a family of seven in the show, who all live in
Brooklyn, New York: Heathcliff “Cliff” Huxtable and Clair Hanks-Huxtable, the heads of the
household, and their five children Sondra Huxtable-Tibideaux, Denise Huxtable, Theodore
“Theo” Huxtable, Vanessa Huxtable, and Rudith “Rudy” Huxtable. Cliff is an obstetrician and
Clair is a lawyer. Their oldest daughter, Sondra, had already successfully finished both high
school and college prior to the show being aired. Obvious differences between the shows are
apparent as early as the given names in the characters of The Cosby Show; Huxtable and
Tibideaux don’t typically portray the surnames of Black families, even if the mention of Cliff’s
and Clair’s occupations (assumingly uncommonly prestigious for Black parents of that time) was
left out. If these characters were to be placed somewhere within a written text like a novel, the
reader—just from reading their last names—would most likely believe that the storyline is based
on a well-off, middle class White family. Even still, if it is mentioned that the family and the
characters are Black, the reader would probably have to continuously remind themselves of this
fact because stereotypically this was considered uncommon. Although Cliff is throughout the
28
show a bit goofy with his children and his wife, this characterization seems to work better for
him rather than with J.J. of “Good Times” because of his intellectual and financial status,
involvement, and background.
One of the episodes entitled “I’m ‘In’ with the ‘In’ Crowd,” Vanessa goes over to a
friend’s house for a small get-together and she and her other friends are peer pressured into
playing a drinking game. Vanessa is the only one who shows long-lasting reluctance to join in
the game. This aspect may not have been seen as “relatable” during Hurston’s time period
because of the assumption that Blacks are untamed children that are not given any of the values
or moral teachings that Vanessa expressed. Drunken Vanessa is brought home by her older sister
Denise in secret, but Cliff and Clair find out about Vanessa’s wrongdoing and punish her for it.
This may be seen only as a “White” parenting if it were presented during Hurston’s period
because it is assumed that during this time Blacks as parents let their children run wildly and do
whatever they please with no strict guidelines, boundaries, or rules.
Further along in the episode when Heath and Clair discuss what happened with Vanessa,
Theo makes a comment about how much pressure it is to be a Huxtable and that may have been a
reason why she was drinking. He says, “Because of what you two have achieved, the whole
world expects a lot much more from us than other kids…. Think about it, Dad, you’re a doctor.
Mom’s a lawyer. That’s a lot of pressure.” Clair responds to him by saying, “But we’ve never
said to you, ‘Son become a doctor, become a lawyer.’ We say, ‘Go to school,’ we say, ‘Study,’
we say, ‘Become whatever you want.’” This would also typically be seen as “White” parenting
because during Hurston’s time period it was preconceived that Blacks as parents did not guide
their children as displayed by the Huxtable parents in this episode and throughout the entire
show. If these qualities were to be presented as the norm during Hurston’s period without any
29
background information given concerning the characters’ race, it is perceived that one might
assume this family was White.
The critics of both shows, Black and White, had positive and negative feedback as far as
character portrayal was concerned, as well as how believable it was considered to society at the
time. Critics of Good Times believe that the series’ portrayal of traditional parents who instilled
positive morals and values within their children, all while living in the Chicago projects where
crime and unemployment were extremely prevalent, was one of the more constructive aspects of
the television series. However, once the show became more comical and not taken as seriously as
it had been from the beginning, ratings dropped. Esther Rolle (who played Florida) complained
to Ebony magazine about how the producers, writers, and directors dumbed-down J.J.’s
characterization. She stated “that says to black kids that you can make it by standing on the
corner saying ‘Dyn-O-Mite’! J.J. is eighteen and he doesn't work. He can't read or write. The
show didn't start out to be that. Little by little...they have made J.J. more stupid.… Negative
images have been quietly slipped in on us through the character of the oldest child” (Spadoni).
John Amos (who played James) also, though not as publicly, expressed his distaste for the
writers’ portrayal of J.J. throughout the series. He felt that the writers would rather have J.J.
“prance around saying ‘DY-NO-MITE!.’ and that way they could waste a few minutes and not
have to write meaningful dialogue.” The complaint brought up by Amos caused him to be fired
and killed off the series. Rolle only agreed to return to the show for filming if she was given
higher salary, required to recite more meaningful dialogue, and if J.J.’s character was forced to
become more responsible (Spadoni).
The ruckus was over whether or not the portrayal of J.J. as a young Black male may or
may not have been as much of a problem for White producers during that time. This is just the
30
type of material the publishers looked for in Hurston’s argument and wanted embedded within
the writings of Black literature because it seemed to be more “realistic” and “made more sense,”
versus having a family express and show love and support for one another.
Critics of The Cosby Show were more torn and not as one-sided about their opinions
about the show, opposed to how critics of Good Times were. Many people who watched the
show, critic or not, admired the positive light shone on Black families. Bill Cosby was praised
for his crafty and creative ability to show only a small portion of the Black population that was
barely notable for the rest of the country during that time and his portrayal of Blacks who were
well-educated and successful broke the traditional racial stereotypes. The show enabled audience
members to feel better about themselves and possibly prouder to be Black. “[P]ersistent struggles
against domination are displaced and translated into celebrations of black middle class visibility
and achievement,” stated Herman Gray in his book, Television, Black Americans, and the
American Dream”(Budd and Steinmann).
Aside from his accreditation, Cosby was ridiculed by some critics due to the lack of
realism he demonstrated in the show. Cosby’s demonstration for some to U.S. whites is that they
“no longer feel blacks are discriminated against in the schools, the job market and the courts”
(Budd and Steinmann). Of course, even in the 1980s after the Civil Rights movement, that was
not the case—it’s not even the case today, though the activity of it is so much more hush-hush—
so it is understandable for the general public to have been upset with Cosby’s limited depiction
of Black families at the time. Furthermore, another critic stated, “There is very little connection
between the social status of black Americans and the fabricated images of black people that
Americans consume each day” (Budd and Steinmann). If Bill Cosby were a white man, if the
Huxtables were white, this would not have been an issue at all. Cosby was stripped from feeling
31
good about doing something good simply because he didn’t abide by the stereotypical
presentation of a struggling, impoverished Black family. If he had decided to be an author rather
than write a show for television, his novel would not have been published.
The comparisons of the three presented texts, Hurston’s What White Publishers Won’t
Print, Lear’s Good Times, and Cosby’s The Cosby Show, are all in correlation to each other of
how picky and stereotypical race relations were in the mid- to late-20th Century, no matter that
one piece was criticizing book publication of Black literature and the other two were
demonstrating television portrayal of Black families. Good Times would have succeeded well as
a novel instead of a television show because of the stereotypes and comical remarks presented
about Blacks, whereas The Cosby Show wouldn’t have been accepted as the novels during
Hurston’s time period if the characters were to stay Black instead of white.
32
Works Cited
Budd, Mike and Steinmann, Clay. "White Racism and The Cosby Show." Jump Cut 37 (1992):
5-12. Jump Cut: A Review of Contemporary Media. Web. 14 Dec. 2013.
<http://www.ejumpcut.org/archive/onlinessays/JC37folder/Cosby.html>.
Cosby, Bill. " I'm 'In' with the 'In' Crowd." The Cosby Show. NBC. 5 Oct. 1989. YouTube, 22
Feb. 2014. Web. 13 Apr. 2014. < https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A8DM7Jyfqo0>.
Hurston, Zora N. "What White Publishers Won't Print" 1950. The Norton Anthology of Theory
and Criticism. 2nd ed. New York: W.W. Norton &, 2010. 1023-027. Print.
Lear, Norman. "The Family Gun." Good Times. CBS. 16 Sept. 1975. YouTube. Crackle, 11 Oct.
2013. Web. 14 Dec. 2013. <http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2ApPvCp7I1Q>.
Spadoni, Mike. "Good Times | A Television Heaven Review." Good Times | A Television
Heaven Review. N.p., Jan. 2003. Web. 12 Dec. 2013.
33
Commentary
In first reading Kalyn Dunkins’ paper applying Zora Neale Hurston’s arguments to The Cosby
Show and Good Times, I was surprised that such an astute media analysis was performed by a
first-year student. Kalyn’s paper is a wonderful example of sticking close to the text while still
incorporating hers and Hurston’s arguments into the presentation of that evidence. However,
initially her analysis discussed one source more than the other. In the Center, we discussed
balancing her analysis – what was there was great, and as a reader, I was eager to hear more! I
was also impressed with Kalyn’s boldness as a writer, and her willingness to assert her argument
as hers, something many first-year writers shy away from. But along with this boldness, I felt
that she needed to work on formalizing her paper, making it less of a conversation from a friend
to another, but from a scholar to an academic audience. The final product is a wonderful
culmination of Kalyn’s already intriguing paper with our informative session in the Writing
Center.
--Olivia Davidson, Writing Center Consultant
34
Eliminative Materialism: An Artistic Lens
By Malorie Eisenbrei
The question of what drives human beings to think and behave the way that they do has
pervaded philosophical thought since the time of Descartes. Twentieth century materialists
approach human interactions with the world as objective manifestations of the physical mind.
Some materialists are so extreme as to propose that all communication should be reduced to the
objective reports of brain functions. This theory, defended by thinkers such as Paul Churchland
for its potential to simplify and clarify communication, is problematic in that it undermines a
sense of subjectivity required to understand art and literature, and it fails to recognize the
benefits of ambiguity in regular human relationships. By discussing human relationships with art
and with each other, I will show how Churchland’s claim that communication would be
improved if it was reduced to straightforward accounts of brain activity is deficient. I will begin
by briefly explaining materialist views, and go on to construct the argument reducing
communication to brain functions is harmful to communication because subjectivity is
beneficial. Subjectivity of artistic and literary experiences are what allow people to enjoy those
experiences fully, and ambiguity in human relationships add substance to our interactions. I
argue that because individual experiences and the process of interpretation are valuable,
eliminative materialism would not harm human interaction contrary to what Churchland
suggests. Materialist philosophy is a tradition that emerged in the twentieth century that attempts to
reduce human behavior and thought to neural impulses that happen in the brain. Among the least controversial materialist perspectives is that of D. M. Armstrong, who believed that although a
person’s brain may compel him or her to act a certain way, those actions can be cognitively
35
stifled if that person so chooses. For instance, one may feel sadness but resist the urge to cry
because something else drives the person to keep the emotion internal. Armstrong calls this
phenomena “selective behavior,” asserting that people have natural predispositions, and
consciousness should be defined as awareness of one’s own brain states (83). These
predispositions may be outwardly manifested in actions. Unlike earlier materialists, Armstrong
does not directly link all unconscious brain states to behavior, implying instead that people have
conscious control over their actions. This less extreme version of materialism can be extended to
influence the way a person lives his or her life and relates to other people. Churchland builds on Armstrong’s perspective, claiming that conscious awareness of a
person’s own brain state can help in communication with others. Churchland’s argument begins
with the acceptance that human thoughts and emotions can be reduced to functions of the brain.
This perspective leads him to the belief that materialism has the potential to aid communication
between humans by clarifying what a person thinks and feels. Churchland argues that
materialism can and should be used to “increase… mutual understanding… [and] contribute
substantially toward a more peaceful and human society” (281). He exemplifies historic failures
of science as evidence that “folk psychology”--or generally accepted ideas of the way a human
mind works--is flawed because it leads to too much ambiguity in human interactions. Since
generally accepted scientific theories have failed in the past, Churchland sees no reason not to
overturn “folk psychology” in favor of materialism. By communicating with straightforward
accounts of the way one’s brain is functioning, people will dramatically increase transparency in dialogue. This extension of a materialist theory of human nature is dramatically more extreme
than that of Armstrong. While Armstrong offers an account of how people operate, Churchland
attempts to extend materialism to dictate the way people live. He acknowledges potential
36
problems with his argument, predicting that his critics will point to the subjectivity of emotion as
evidence that the human experience is more complex than simple brain states. This objection
relates directly to how people understand art, and creates potential problems for Churchland in
explaining how or why humans find value in material that is inherently subjective. Because using materialist philosophy to guide the ways people communicate would
increase clarity, Churchland claims that it has the potential to create a more peaceful world.
Maximizing understanding of the motives that drive people to behave in certain ways would
certainly increase awareness of differences and similarities between individuals, and perhaps
entire cultures. However, if precision is the goal of communication and subjectivity should be
eliminated from human interactions, then Churchland would likely support the application of
brain-state-driven communication to painting and literature. Art, which either expresses or
attempts to influence the way a person thinks or behaves, only has value to Churchland if it
directly reflects the neurological behavior of the subject or the artist. Because the purpose of art
is often to assist human beings in understanding subjective matter, conventionally accepted
artwork has little to no purpose in Churchland’s ideal society. Churchland would likely argue that visual art is essentially useless unless it is used to
study the way brains operates. The subjective aspects of human nature are perceived to be
inhibitors to communication. While Churchland would not dismiss all forms of art as worthless-it is reasonable to assume he may still find value in “stream of consciousness” compositions such as Mark Rothko’s “Untitled 1945” for their potential to reveal aspects of brain functions (Mark
Rothko: Myths and Symbols 4)--he would find little use for art that is intended to be confusing,
mysterious, or an indirect representation of the artists’ beliefs. For instance, the works of Dada
artists, which reject coherence entirely or the possibility of a stable society, have little or no
37
value according to Churchland’s view. These examples pose a problem for Churchland’s
argument because people do in fact find value in a variety of artforms. Outside the realm of
visual art, the way people write literature and poetry would also need to change to meet
Churchland’s standards of communication. Rather than providing a subjective account of the
way a character experiences events, novels would be reduced to a collection of brain functions
happening in sequence. While they would continue to allow readers to peer into the minds of
others, most people would agree that something is lost in stories when they are told from a purely
objective perspective. If artists and authors took a purely materialist approach to the way they
produce their work, something would be lost in the communication that requires some level of
incoherence or misunderstanding. For this reason, eliminative materialism is flawed in that its
application to the real world would require people to give up some of the most appealing
qualities of art and literature. That there is value in subjectivity, and by extension in the process
of interpretation, is evident in an evaluation of art. I will argue that in having individual interpretations of another person’s behavior, that
other person is humanized. If humans and their thoughts were reduced to simple functions of the
brain, they would seem mechanical and lacking depth. Although communicating through reports
of what one’s brain is doing may increase precision in understanding, it would reduce empathy in
that the many dimensions driving human behavior would be reduced to a flat statement. Since art and literature have the ability to communicate multiple elements of a person’s behavior,
extending eliminative materialism to these means of communication would cause them to lose
some value. This problem is best exemplified through an account of literature that relies on
interpretation and intentionally ambiguous literary devices such as metaphor. Margaret
Mitchell’s Gone with the Wind is an example of how literature can serve to communicate on
38
multiple levels, many of which would be removed by reducing the text to brain states. On the
surface, Gone with the Wind is a war novel about the American South before, during, and after
the Civil War. If it was reduced in the way Churchland suggests, it would be a straightforward
account of the obstacles the heroine Scarlett O’Hara faces as she tries to rebuild her comfortable
lifestyle that was lost during the war. If Churchland had written Gone with the Wind, Scarlett’s most famous line may have
been reduced to: “I do not want my pancreas to produce ghrelin again.” This extremely
straightforward statement communicates the heroine’s desire for food, but does not
accommodate other interpretations of the quote. While readers would be certain that Scarlett’s
character was feeling hunger caused by the hormone ghrelin, they would not perceive the
broader implications of the statement. By instead proclaiming, “I will never be hungry again!”
(Mitchell 658), Scarlett allows readers to understand her plight in multiple ways. While the
statement can still be taken literally, it has broader implications. In the context of the novel as a
whole, the statement may be applied to the attitude some Southerners took in the face of defeat,
as well as a contrast between Scarlett and other characters who are less adaptable. Scarlett’s
resilience is a reflection of the attitude an entire society is taking in the face of defeat. If Gone
with the Wind is interpreted as a feminist novel, the statement may be understood as Scarlett’s
decision to assume responsibility for her loved ones--particularly her sisters and son, who are
essentially without father figures--by taking control of Tara and eventually starting her own
business. Giving only a surface account of a character’s behavior or beliefs removes value for the
reader insofar that their individual interpretations of a piece of writing is removed. The ability to interpret art in ways that transcend the objective surface meanings stems
from the ability to understand other human beings on multiple levels. If people communicated by
39
Churchland’s standards, some of the most relatable aspects of interaction would be lost. By
describing the experience of the Civil War and Reconstruction through metaphor, Margaret
Mitchell draws readers into her novel in ways neurological impulses cannot. When an emotion or
feeling is reduced to chemical reactions within the body, that emotion or feeling is
communicated less wholistically. The problems Churchland’s eliminative materialism faces
when put into the context of art speaks more broadly to how people are inclined to interact with
each other. If people were to abide by his standards of communication, relationships with other
humans beings as well as art would lack depth or potency because the experiences of others
would seem less personal. Experiences as they are subjectively understood are unique to each
individual. If they were communicated through brain functions, people would lose some sense of
individuality in themselves and their peers. Churchland’s version of materialism is problematic
in that by removing subjective experiences, he challenges conventionally accepted standards of
how people should relate to others and risks desensitizing people to others’ experiences. Although eliminative materialism cannot be reconciled with traditional forms of literature
or the concept of human beings as more deserving of respect than machines, a less radical
perspective of materialism may be applicable. For example, D. M. Armstrong relates a materialist perspective of the human mind to the way people behave rather than the way they
communicate. Armstrong is more concerned with explaining why people act the way they do,
claiming that a purely physical conception of humans implies that they are influenced by “a
special inner state… postulated to explain [a person’s] behavior” (81). Although people may
have a “disposition to behave” in a certain way, a material mind does not imply that people
should communicate through accounts of brain functions (Armstrong 77). Furthermore,
something resembling subjectivity can be salvaged from Armstrong’s perspective through his
40
proposal that consciousness is merely “awareness of the state of [one’s] own mind” (83).
Armstrong does not reject that people have conscious experiences, and he does not dehumanize
people by denying that those experiences are multifaceted and complex. Rather, he suggests that
the state of “consciousness” itself is misunderstood. Furthermore, he accepts the possibility that a
person’s individual experience influences the way they understand the world and are inclined to
behave. Since his version of materialism does not seek to change the way people communicate
with others, it can be reconciled with the fact that art and literature have value. It does not
undermine the subjectivity with which people experience the creative works of others or relate to
other human beings. I have attempted to show that Churchland’s argument that communication should be
reduced to an account of brain states is problematic insofar as it challenges the way people
understand art and others. However, materialism itself is not totally irreconcilable with
conventionally understood means of understanding. If a materialist perspective is applied only to
the way people behave and their “predispositions” as Armstrong suggests, it remains a practical
way to view the human mind. It is unlikely that people will ever be inclined to accept Churchland’s perspective. The implications of the view that the human experience is nothing
more than chemical reactions within the brain undermines a sense of individuality and self value.
An evaluation of literature reveals that some statements, though simple on the surface, have the
capacity to reveal significant motivations and emotions people experience. For this reason, some
level of ambiguity and misunderstanding may be beneficial in that it forces people to view others
as more than mere machines. 41
Works Cited John McHugh, ed. In FYS 102. McGraw Hill Education: Create, 2013. Print. Armstrong, D.M.. “The Nature of the Mind (complete): with Study Questions.” McHugh 73-84 Ryle, Gilbert. “The Concept of the Mind.” McHugh 62-72 Churchland, Paul M.. "Eliminative Materialism." Trans. Array Matter and Consciousness.
Bradford Books, 1984. 280-84. Print. Magee, Elaine. "Your 'Hunger Hormones'."WebMD. WebMD, n.d. Web. 22 Oct. 2013.
<http://www.webmd.com/diet/features/your-hunger-hormones>. "Mark Rothko: Myths & Symbols 4." NGA. National Gallery of Art, n.d. Web. 22 Oct. 2013. Mitchell, Margaret. Gone with the Wind. New York: Macmillan, 1936. Print. 42
Commentary
Malorie’s first draft of “Eliminative Materialism: An Artistic Lens” was memorable because of
its clarity and its astute observations. Her writing style was direct without being plain, and she
built her argument into a nice structure. I really enjoyed her use of not only philosophical texts,
but also artistic and literary sources. When we met to talk about the revision process, Malorie
fixed the minor, sentence-level errors on her own. Although her essay was very strong, we
discussed more global issues, such as the length of her paragraphs, which often stretched over a
page long. By separating longer paragraphs into shorter ones with clear main points, her
argument became even more precise. The only other significant changes we made were to her
introductory paragraph; by reimagining it as a “roadmap,” a term the professor of her Philosophy
of Human Nature course coined, she was able to layout the main points of her paper for the
reader before presenting her argument and thesis.
--Kelsey Hagarman, Writing Center Consultant
43
H.G. Wells’ The Time Machine: Beyond Science and Fiction
By Allie Vugrincic
A weary, red sun rises over a distant planet—or perhaps our own planet, thousands of
years in the future—as the new mankind breathes in the crystalline air of their pristine society. A
rocket burns a pathway against a background of stars. Science challenges the human mind’s
potential ability to travel in time and space. There is something utterly captivating in an idea that
can inspire the reader to look beyond themselves into a universe overflowing with fantastic or
horrific possibilities—possibilities that seem just barely beyond the longing grasp of humanity.
This is the essence of the literary genre of science fiction, a genre defined by its exploration of
the seemingly impossible via the expansion of modern technology. Science fiction is willing to
go beyond the boundaries of time and space to transport readers into the distant future, to new
planets, and even to alternate realities.
The genre was introduced in the mid-1600s with the fantasy work The Blazing World by
Margret Cavendish and born in its modern form in 1818 with the publication of Mary Shelley’s
Frankenstein. As a social force, it draws much of its power from its tendency to become “a
mirror of common opinion” in popular realms of critical thought, and the ability to expand those
commonly held ideas into something magnificent and enduring.51 It is also a genre that by its
very nature is heavily influenced by the time period from which it came: the nineteenth century,
a time of scientific discovery and expanding technology, where Social Darwinism was an
emerging notion and Romanticism a lingering ideal. These concepts came together and
manifested themselves in literary works that strove to question the limits of human ingenuity and
51
Robert H. West, “Science Fiction and Its Ideas” The Georgia Review 15, no. 3 (October 1, 1961): 278. Carl D. Malmgren, Worlds Apart: Narratology of Science Fiction (Indianapolis, Indiana University Press 1991), 2. 44
social structure. No preceding genre so beautifully combined the ethical and aesthetic to achieve
a social commentary on the increasing possibilities for good and evil.52 The complex social
atmosphere in which science fiction developed allowed for a diverse range of topics to be
explored—from the moral qualms of technology to the prospects of exploration. In an age of
progress where ideas were moving faster than they ever had before, change became a constant
rule.53 Science fiction, as a “form of enlightened social critique” likewise adopted, or rather was
founded upon, this same view.54
One of the foremost literary masters of nineteenth century science fiction, Herbert
George Wells, saw the unprecedented rate of change as the defining characteristic of the
nineteenth century. He wrote several works dealing with said change, including his 1901 nonfiction, Anticipations of the Reaction of Mechanical and Scientific Progress upon Human Life
and Thought.55 Wells, known for being a man “not pleased with the world he lived in,” did not
leave his fascination with the future of mankind exclusively in non-fiction.56 Instead, Wells used
his knowledge of nineteenth century science to enhance his fictional glimpse at the fate of
mankind in his work The Time Machine. Written in 1895, The Time Machine showcases Wells’s
masterful marriage of the Romantic ideals of his Victorian England to the popular debates of
scientific and human change. These conditions culminate in a work that critiques social behavior
and humanity.
52
Paul K. Alkon, Science Fiction Before 1900: Imagination Discovers Technology (New York, Twayne Publishers, 1994), xi. 53
Malmgren, Worlds Apart: Narratology of Science Fiction, 5. 54
Peter Y. Paik, From Utopia to Apocalypse: Science Fiction and the Politics of Catastrophe Minneapolis, University of Minnesota Press, 2010), 3. 55
Alkon, Science Fiction Before 1900: Imagination Discovers Technology, 15. 56
J. Kagarlitski, The Life and Thought of H. G. Wells, translated by Moura Budberg (New York: Barnes&Nobles, 1966), xi. 45
A Genre of Social Critique
Wells favored the use of fiction as an avenue for political and social commentary. He
believed the duty of a fiction author was “to be the social mediator” and “instrument of selfexamination” for the masses.57 Science fiction, a genre partially founded by Wells, allowed him
to pose questions regarding the social status quo to an emerging audience of readers who
commonly lacked the ability to understand life outside of their experience. With fiction, Wells
was able to present these complex and sometimes abstract ideas to audiences in a way which was
easy to grasp.58 Science fiction especially proved to be useful in assessing such intellectual
aspects of life, as science validated fiction and gave educated audiences a rational vehicle for
stories of the impossible.59
Wells takes readers to the year 802,701; a time long past the height of human society,
when man has devolved and split into two starkly different races—the beautiful and helpless
Eloi, and the horrifying ape-like Morlocks. These two descendants of man become a vehicle for
Wells’s sermon on the progression of humanity, in which he lays out problems of his time with
the fatalism of science fiction.60 Fatalism here refers to the inescapable progression of the world
due to humans and nature. This idea becomes a theme that grows throughout the journey of
Wells’s protagonist, the Time Traveler. Though never the foreground of critique, Well’s does
invite the reader to consider fate as a fixed entity, and perhaps even to question if it can be
changed.
57
Alkon, Science Fiction Before 1900: Imagination Discovers Technology, 8. “Mr. H. G. Wells on Novels.” The Times of India (1861-­‐Current). February 14, 1912, sec. http://0search.proquest.com.dewey2.library.denison.edu/hnptimesofindia/docview/231293091/citation/
1424F79B85948E6CFB/9?accountid=10474. 58
Kagarlitski, The Life and Thought of H. G. Wells, Budberg translation, 21. 59
Alkon, Science Fiction Before 1900: Imagination Discovers Technology, 49 60
West, “Science Fiction and Its Ideas”: 278. 46
More prevalently, however, Wells’s Time Machine deals with newly developed social
classes that divided his nineteenth century society. Upon his first encounter with the Eloi, “very
beautiful and graceful creature[s],” the Time Traveler describes the being’s frail beauty.61 Slight
in stature—no more than four feet tall—and “clad in a purple tunic” the first Eloi the Time
Traveler meets is classified as “the more beautiful kind of consumptive” creating an immediate
association with luxury.62 The creature’s beauty, as well as the later observed “peculiarities in
their Dresden-china type of prettiness” is attributed to an aristocratic lineage.63 This parallel to
the upper-class of Wells’s time encourages one to contemplate the class system; the idea of the
“consumptive” seems to chide the bourgeoisie for their extravagance, as the image of purple
robes invokes memories of ancient kings.
The Eloi alone, however, are not enough to truly provide a criticism of social structure; it
takes the appearance of the second, more animalistic descendant of man to create a critique of
the Victorian class system. The Morlocks, a subterranean species contrast the Eloi’s
representation of the upper class by standing in for the working class in Wells’s year 802,701.
The Time Traveler characterizes the Morlocks much like animals: “it was a dull white, and had
strange large grayish-red eyes; also [there was] flaxen hair on its head and down its back.”64 The
Time Traveler aligns the Morlocks’ pale skin and lack of beauty with their apparent decent from
the working class, who, the Time Traveler supposes, were forced underground so that the upper
world could remain free of the eyesores of industry. The Morlocks, like their proletariat
ancestors, toil to create the products “necessary to the comfort of the daylight race.”65 It is in this
way that Wells, via his Time Traveler, presents a tale of a complete social schism that resulted in
61
H. G. Wells, The Time Machine (New York: Bantam Classics, 2003), 26. Ibid. 63
Ibid, 28. 64
Ibid, 55. 65
Ibid, 57. 62
47
the development of two completely different species: “The gradual widening” of the gap
between laborers and capitalists is declared the “key to the whole position,” reinforcing the
fatalism of the novel by suggesting this breakdown is inevitable if the class system remains in
place.66 This eventuality is an unavoidable consequence of human nature; the “real aristocracy,”
the Time Traveler witnesses is a “logical conclusion of the industrial system” of the nineteenth
century.67
The inescapable fate of mankind to evolve in such a way brings into focus a second
nineteenth century issue that Wells eagerly dissects through the juxtaposition of the Morlocks
and the Eloi: Social Darwinism. This is a concept that can be traced back to the late 1870s and
would have been a highly discussed topic during Wells’s lifetime.68 It is no surprise, then, that
distinct references to Darwin’s evolutionary theory appear in The Time Machine. Wells applies
Darwinian Theory to man, both as a social creature and as an animal with the basic ability to
adapt. With a scientific perspective, Wells’s Time Traveler considers the aspects of evolution
that would have resulted in the human species’ degeneration and split into two humanoid
remnants.
The frailty of the Eloi is easily attributed to an adaptation to a lifestyle free of conflict,
disease, and danger. As daily life for the Eloi no longer requires the strength to overcome
struggles, those who were once considered weak become equal with the strong and “are indeed
no longer weak.”69 The Eloi are also characterized as unintelligent, though well-meaning,
beings. The Time Traveler remarks on their carefree attitude and considers their disinterest in
66
Ibid, 58. Ibid, 59. 68
Paul Crook, “Social Darwinism: The Concept.” History of European Ideas 22, no. 4 (July 1996): 261. 69
Wells, The Time Machine, 39. 67
48
him a mark of lower intellect.70 The Time Traveler is taken aback when he is asked by an Eloi if
he and his time machine came from a thunderstorm, “a question that showed him to be on the
intellectual level of our five-year-old children.”71 The Eloi’s intelligence, the Time Traveler
reasons, is diminished because they are not plagued with solving problems. Wells harkens to
scientific Darwinism as the Time Traveler remarks on the necessity of change for the existence
of intellect:
“It is a law of nature that we overlook, that intellectual versatility is the compensation for
change, danger, and trouble. An animal perfectly in harmony with its environment is a
perfect mechanism. Nature never appealed to intelligence until habit and instinct are
useless. There is no intelligence where there is no change and no need of change. Only
those animals partake of intelligence that have to meet a huge variety of needs and
dangers.”72
In the wake of a perfect harmony with nature, idleness becomes the Eloi’s poison, causing the
downfall of humanity from the inquisitive exploration of the nineteenth century to child’s play in
802,701. The Eloi have no need for intelligence, so it is lost.
The Time Traveler invokes social Darwinism when he suggests that this process of
degeneration due to lack of stimulant was a “logical consequence” of an artificial environment of
stability. Wells’s argument becomes multilayered when he also calls attention to the “civilising
mission” which may refer to civilization within Europe, but certainly is reminiscent to the
“mission” of imperialism, which was at its height in the late nineteenth century:73 Well’s Time
Traveler remarks on the “odd consequence of the social effort in which we are at present
engaged,” where the social effort is the attempted civilizing of peoples considered to be brutish
70
Ibid, 33. Ibid, 29. 72
Ibid, 97. 73
Robin J. Winks and Joan Neuberger, Europe and the Making of Modernity (New York: Oxford, 2005), 257. 71
49
and the consequence, strangely enough, is the creation of a feeble society.74 This brief reference
to imperialism may be an extension of Wells’s social criticism beyond the physical boundaries of
Europe to condemn the disruption of the natural evolution of society caused by Europeans
interactions with peoples of “less advanced” areas. Indeed, this would be in line with his
prediction of humanity’s over-civilization. It is likely Wells simply saw this as an opportunity to
enhance his overall theory about the progression of society. Wells also touches on his recurring
theme of fatalism with the remark that “security sets a premium on feebleness” and such a secure
society will inevitably degrade intellectually and physically.75
On the other side of the Wells’s new spectrum of humanity, the Morlocks stand not
feeble, but animalistic. Already mentioned was the Time Traveler’s supposition that the
Morlocks became subterranean after industry was sent below ground. Naturally the Morlocks
developed pale skin and the climbing skills required to ascend and descend the long ladders that
link them to the surface. Furthering the theme of evolution to adapt to the environment, the
Morlocks have developed an ability to see in the dark and an extreme aversion to sunlight as a
result of their underground existence. The Morlocks, otherwise slighted by this evolutionary
process, are endowed with one remnant of human ingenuity that their aboveground relatives
lack: due to their continued contact with machinery, the Morlocks retained some rudimentary
intelligence required to do their work.76 The Time Traveler realizes this slight evolutionary
advantage is hugely beneficial to the Morlocks, who are revealed in a startling moment to be
cannibalistically preying on the defenseless Eloi.
74
Wells, The Time Machine, 36. Ibid. 76
John S. Partington, “‘The Time Machine’ and ‘A Modern Utopia’: The Static and Kinetic Utopias of the Early H.G. Wells.” Utopian Studies 13, no. 1 (June 2002): 62. Wells, The Time Machine, 97. 75
50
Victorian Romanticism in The Time Machine
In addition to the blatant social critiques of Victorian England, Wells adopted another
nineteenth century ideal—one that became prevalent in science fiction—Romanticism. From the
lofty descriptions of architecture to the sentiment of a lost time and the ravenous images of
nature reclaiming the world, Wells shrouds his critique in beautiful Romantic reflection. The
Time Machine, as well as a few of Wells’s other early works, have been deemed ‘scientific
romances’ by literary scholars, as well as by Wells himself.77 The idea of scientific romance
may on the surface appear contradictory as Romanticism is often viewed as the artistic rebuttal to
the Enlightenment’s love of scientific advancement, an idea that is a cornerstone of science
fiction. However Romanticism was not a complete dismissal of science in favor of art and human
thought; rather it was a movement that hoped to use the discovery and empowerment of the
Enlightenment to advance human understanding and feeling.78 Science and Romanticism were
never mutually exclusive, and in some of its varied forms the latter actually was built upon the
former. One must also take into account that Wells was writing after the height of both
movements, at a time when it was possible to bring the two together as an entirely new idea.
Likewise, the science in Wells’s science fiction is not entirely empirical—it is often downplayed
to the point of acting as a “device” to perpetuate the message of the story.79 In this case, a
message more in line with Romantic ideals.
Much of the Romanticism in Wells’s Time Machine is motivated by a rejection of
industrialization. The Morlocks, which represent everything the Time Traveler fears, are aligned
with technology and industrialization; they are beings of “mere mechanical industry” banished,
77
Alkon, Science Fiction Before 1900: Imagination Discovers Technology, 7. Winks and Neuberger, Europe and the Making of Modernity, 42. 79
Malmgren, Worlds Apart: Narratology of Science Fiction, 14. 78
51
in the futuristic society, to the underground with other horrible things.80 This continued
commentary on the Morlocks’ industrial prowess sustains the plot and progress the story while
adding to Wells’s argument about the potential destructiveness of the class system and playing
into the Romanticism of the novel. Industrialization was a topic Romantics found interesting
because it represented a significant change in day to day life. Some favored the bleakness of
industrial towns, clouded with smog and the lives of thousands of workers crammed together,
while other Romantics feared industrialization because it was a further departure from the
beloved days of old.81
The Romantic battle between the glory of industry and the sentimentality of nature is
represented in the aesthetic differences between the Morlocks and Eloi, and echoed in Wells’s
intense imagery of nature reclaiming the world from man. As industrialization claimed expanses
of Europe throughout the nineteenth century, many romantics became concerned with the
destruction of nature caused by growing cities.82 People were becoming more isolated from
nature, which became “an abstract consumer product,” that was more an outside force than
something the common man understood.83 One of the many romantic views of the century was
the belief that nature would eventually dominate over man, as it had in the past. Wells’s Time
Traveler expresses the same sentiment as he describes the “condition of ruinous splendor” in
which he finds the world:84
“A little way up the hill…was a great heap of granite, bound together by masses of
aluminum, a vast labyrinth of precipitous walls and crumbled heaps, amidst which were
80
Wells, The Time Machine, 98. Winks and Nerburger, Europe and the Making of Modernity, 83. 82
Winks and Neuberger, Europe and the Making of Modernity, 42. 83
Peter Heymans, Animality in British Romanticism: The Aesthetics of Species (New York, Routledge, 2012), 20. 84
Wells, The Time Machine, 33. 81
52
very beautiful pagoda-like plants…It was evidently the derelict remains of some vast
structure…”85
All the great forces of nature slowly reclaim the landscape that man once made great. Eventually,
as the Time Traveler takes another leap into the future beyond 802,701, nature is all that is left in
a silent world: “It would be hard to convey the stillness of it. All the sounds of Man, the bleating
of sheep, the cries of birds, the hum of insects, the stir that makes the background of our lives—
all that was over.”86 Man as a species is ultimately lost as the planet lives its final days; another
inescapable fate for humanity that plays so well into the web of critique Wells has spun.
Nature’s repossession of the world at the end of the planet’s lifetime also demonstrates
another Romantic quality of the novel which is unrelated to industrialization. The Romantics of
the nineteenth century loved to focus on the extraordinary moments of human experience;
namely, life and death. This grand death of the planet and disappearance of the human race is
arguably the greatest extreme in the history of the planet since its formation. Wells, in a moment
of supreme Romanticism, allows his readers a fleeting glimpse at the end of time.
The Message of H. G. Wells: What Makes us Human?
Wells takes his readers all the way to the end of time to pose hard-hitting questions
concerning social behavior, evolution, and the consequences of human nature. At the same time,
The Time Machine inadvertently set up a road map of the nineteenth century, from lingering
Enlightenment ideals to Romanticism, industrialization to social Darwinism, and the growth of
the divide between capitalist and laborer—all while establishing the trademarks of a developing
genre, of which H. G. Wells was a founder. When viewed as a whole clear connections between
85
Ibid. Ibid, 105. 86
53
social critiques, trademarks of the time period, and the genre itself arise and establish the
uniqueness of science fiction as a literary power. The Time Machine manages to serve as a
mirror of its time and record of history while flinging readers into the distant future. Perhaps
most importantly it invites the readers to contemplate topics from social class to industrialization,
romanticism and the very nature of humanity.
One late nineteenth century fan of Wells remarked that the novelist believed “that human
nature in books should be no more pliant than it is in life.”87 Indeed Wells enthusiastically
examines the nature of mankind’s fictional descendants—but can these descendants be
considered human at all? In examining and criticizing the world, Wells unintentionally sets up
parameters for humanity. Though Wells never directly poses the question ‘what makes a
human?’ in The Time Machine he certainly dances around the idea. As the Time Traveler, who is
never endowed with a name, first encounters the Eloi he is taken aback by their incredible frailty,
likeness to one another, and lack of intelligence; he easily considers them less advanced than his
contemporaries and deems their lower existence “humanity on the wane.”88 The Morlocks,
despite the remnant of their human ingenuity, are viewed even less favorably by Wells’s Time
Traveler, as “it was impossible, somehow, to feel any humanity in the things.”89 He goes on to
remark that the “sickening quality of the Morlocks,” makes them “inhuman and malign” and
suggests that through their apparent adoption of cannibalism they have lost the instinct and
intelligence that separates humans from their animal cousins.90
Wells suggests that true humanity is something beyond simple ancestry and pure science.
There is an intangible aspect of humanity that distinguishes mankind from the rest of the animal
87
Jones, W. Handley, “The Message of Mr. H. G. Wells,” The Living Age (1897-­‐1941), July 31, 1915. Wells, The Time Machine, 36. 89
Ibid, 82. 90
Ibid, 69. Ibid, 76. 88
54
kingdom. To be human, it seems, involves intelligence and inspiration, the drive to create and
the power to destroy; it is “the loyal alliance of capable men,” built throughout history with
“self-restraint, patience and decision.”91 Humanity is freedom and struggle, thought and desire.
For Wells, the tragedy is that this glorious humanity is fleeting, doomed by a fatalistic universe
to eventually be extinguished by the inhuman duration of time.92 The Time Machine is, in many
ways, a tale of humanity adrift in an apparently meaningless world.93 From the Time Traveler’s
continual search for understanding in the future to the “sunset of mankind” depicted in the last
days of Earth and the futility of arbitrary class distinctions, Wells seems to be wondering how
man, the feeble species that is so easily infected with change, fits into the story of the universe.94
Wells confronts this readers with startling questions and leaves only vague answers.
What, then, does it mean to be human? Is humanity as changing as the quick-paced industry of
the nineteenth century, and as fleeting as the Eloi’s intelligence? Wells laid out the puzzle pieces
on the table and attempted to guide his readers as they put those pieces together, but ultimately it
is left to each individual to find their own meaning. What may be said is this: not all hope is lost
for mankind. It is the fatalistic nature of the novel which inspires the belief that the future does
not have to look like Wells’s year 802,701. Wells warns again and again that the Eloi and
Morlocks’ separation is due to the widening gap between the capitalists and laborers. He reminds
readers that a life saturated with leisure will degrade the mind, and he remarks on the
overwhelming power of nature against man. All this in the hopes that his readers will see the
bleak future to which they have condemned themselves and attempt to make amends before it is
too late. Certainly Wells’s humanity is fated to disintegrate into nothingness, but only because it
91
Ibid, 38. Alkon, Science Fiction Before 1900: Imagination Discovers Technology, 50 93
Ibid, 51. 94
Wells, The Time Machine, 36. 92
55
lies on an ill-built foundation. If even one aspect of society was changed, certainly the entire
future of humanity would find a new path. Abolish the class system and humanity never
separates into two sub-human species. Continue to work hard and mankind will be strong.
Recognize the need for balance with nature, and nature will not overtake the world.
Understand man is flawed, and the future is what we make it.
56
Works Cited
Alkon, Paul K. Science Fiction Before 1900: Imagination Discovers Technology. New York:
Twayne Publishers, 1994.
Crook, Paul. “Social Darwinism: The Concept.” History of European Ideas 22, no. 4 (July 1996):
261.
Heymans, Peter. Animality in British Romanticism: The Aesthetics of Species. New York:
Routledge, 2012.
Jones, W. Handley. “The Message of Mr. H. G. Wells.” The Living Age (1897-1941), July 31,
1915.
Kagarlitski, J. The Life and Thought of H. G. Wells. Translated by Moura Budberg. New York:
Barnes&Nobles, 1966.
Malmgren, Carl D. Worlds Apart: Narratology of Science Fiction. Indianapolis: Indiana
University Press 1991.
“Mr. H. G. Wells on Novels.” The Times of India (1861-Current). February 14, 1912, sec. Books
and Authors.
http://0search.proquest.com.dewey2.library.denison.edu/hnptimesofindia/docview/231293091/cit
ation/1424F79B85948E6CFB/9?accountid=10474.
Paik, Peter Y. From Utopia to Apocalypse: Science Fiction and the Politics of Catastrophe.
Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 2010.
Partington, John S. “‘The Time Machine’ and ‘A Modern Utopia’: The Static and Kinetic
Utopias of the Early H.G. Wells.” Utopian Studies 13, no. 1 (June 2002): 57–68.
Wells, H. G. The Time Machine. New York: Bantam Classics, 2003.
West, Robert H. “Science Fiction and Its Ideas.” The Georgia Review 15, no. 3 (October 1,
1961): 276–286.
Winks, Robin J., and Joan Neuberger. Europe and the Making of Modernity. New York: Oxford,
2005.
57
Commentary
Allie’s essay on H.G. Wells’ The Time Machine is a success for several reasons, not the least of
which is her ability to neatly analyze and relate Wells’ work to the changing world of the
nineteenth century. She accomplishes not only a literary analysis, but also an analysis of the
world that informed Wells’ work. She analyzes several social movements throughout the body of
her paper, relating romanticism, social Darwinism, and the rise of science fiction as a new genre
of fiction to Wells’ Time Machine. This analysis culminates in a comprehensive, well-supported
argument with implications that linger far beyond her conclusion.
--Hannah Bersee, Writing Center Consultant