tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5425514987715337437.post1933534174680658903..comments2024-01-11T21:53:16.420-08:00Comments on Intro to Critical Reading: Melville the Founding FatherAdamhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16302919444091859459noreply@blogger.comBlogger1125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5425514987715337437.post-27061112142268368942011-04-03T11:34:49.338-07:002011-04-03T11:34:49.338-07:00This feels long, and you seem to almost shift topi...This feels long, and you seem to almost shift topics several times - not completely, but there are subtle shifts. You move from the initial broad idea of minorities and majorities into a long-term focus on race, which you explore several ways, including through Queequeg and through the churches. Some of the most interesting shifts are simultaneously the most problematic.<br /><br />To me, for instance, the most interesting moment in the essay was when you shifted into a comparison between Jefferson and Melville, which is partially about Jefferson's deism in relationship with Melville, and partially, I think, about liberty more generally. The thing is that you could write multiple essays on this topic alone - an essay on Melville in relationship with the deism of the founding fathers (not just Jefferson!), or an essay on Melville, Jefferson and race (Jefferson, of course, dreaming of the end of slavery while holding slaves - it's an interesting point of comparison with Melville, especially given his father-in-law's critical role in upholding the fugitive slave act, which I discussed briefly in class at one point, or an essay about Jefferson's expansionism in relationship with Melville's apparent hostility to expansionism.<br /><br />My ultimate point is that the topic of minorities and majorites in MD is an awfully big one. The most obvious evidence for that is that you're only really writing about race, but calling race "majorities and minorities." The difference is important - because there are religious minorities (Quakers and Shakers, to say nothing of pagans and gnostics!) all through the novel, as well as people who *feel* like they are outside because of their financial status, as well as people who are *sexually* different.<br /><br />You do plenty of good work; my point is that you could have been more focused, and given more focus, your research could have been more focused (imagine, for instance, focusing your research on Jefferson alone - how much easier that would have made things in some ways!).Adamhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16302919444091859459noreply@blogger.com