immoratlity

Because I could not stop for Death- Emily Dickinson

Because I could not stop for Death,
He kindly stopped for me;
The carriage held but just ourselves
And Immortality.

We slowly drove, he knew no haste,
And I had put away
My labor, and my leisure too,
For his civility.

We passed the school, where children strove
At recess, in the ring;
We passed the fields of gazing grain,
We passed the setting sun.

Or rather, he passed us;
The dews grew quivering and chill,
For only gossamer my gown,
My tippet only tulle.

We paused before a house that seemed
A swelling of the ground;
The roof was scarcely visible,
The cornice but a mound.

Since then 'tis centuries, and yet each
Feels shorter than the day
I first surmised the horses' heads
Were toward eternity.

In “Because I could not stop for Death,” Emily Dickinson explores the human relationship with death, asserting that, while humans often do not realize how much control death has over them, death ultimately takes everyone and in death humans are able to find an immortality that is impossible in life.

As the poem begins, the speaker displays the perception that death has no control over her. She “could not” stop to accommodate death, indicating that she was above death and could choose whether or not to stop for death. However, her perceptions are quickly proved to be no more than fantasy as, regardless of the speaker’s perceived inability, death stops to take her. From that point on, death is able to completely control the speaker. While the speaker “could not stop,” as if too frantic and worried about life to consider death, death knows “no haste,” displaying death’s ability to force the narrator to slow down. In reaction, the speaker gives up both her “labor” and her “leisure,” work and play, the two main halves of human life, and in doing so symbolically surrenders her life to death.

However, death does not simply control the speaker as a single person. Rather, death is able to control all humans from the moment of birth. This point is emphasized in the “children” that the carriage passes. The narrator specifically emphasizes that it is not the two of them passing, but rather death that “passed us.” This phrase implies choice, suggesting that death made the decision to pass the children with his carriage and not take them as well, and in doing so was allowing them more life. However, the fact that death chose to leave the children also suggests that death always has the power to choose meaning that, regardless of whether or not a human is actually taken by death, all humans are always under the control of death. Death can occur at any time, even as a child.

Ultimately, the speaker finds, everyone dies, even if the person “could not stop for death” and did not have the time. The speaker and death reach a “house that seemed a swelling of the ground,” bringing to mind a grave which, when open, is nothing more than a hole in the ground surrounded by a mound of dirt that swells out of the ground. This imagery of a grave continues as the speaker notes that the “cornice [is] but a mound.” So the speaker finally comes to her grave, controlled by the death that controls all humans, but the speaker does not view this end as a negative development rather, throughout the poem, the speaker suggests that, in death, she is coming home. The speaker “put away” her leisure and labor, suggesting a willingness to give up her life. Dickinson even uses the words “kindly” and “civility” in describing death, portraying death as gentle and welcoming as opposed to unwanted. Death itself is portrayed as a home, as the grave that symbolizes it is seen as a “house,” a place for living. Death becomes a second life where the speaker and humans can find the “eternity” of immortality that is impossible in life before death, the “immortality” that the speaker only encounters for the first time in death’s carriage.

jack

Invisible Man- Ralph Ellison

Jack the bear. Brother Jack. Jack Rabbit. Ball the jack. Invisible Man is filled with jacks, yet each jack takes on a slightly different role and plays a slightly different part in the narrator’s journey. The most obvious and persistent role is in Brother Jack, the man who draws the narrator into the world of the Brotherhood.

As the narrator finds out when Brother Jack reprimands him for organizing Clifton’s funeral, Brother Jack only has one eye. While this partial sight can represent Brother Jack’s blindness and inability to understand anything more than the partial truth of the world, it also brings in the term one-eyed jack, a term used in poker. The one-eyed royals, which include the two jacks (spades and hearts) and one king (diamonds), can be used as wildcards in poker. This represents Brother Jack’s role quite well as his personality and actions are something of a wildcard. At one moment he is supporting the narrator to become the face of the Brotherhood’s activities and the next he’s sending the narrator to an obscure area to lecture on the “Woman Question.” Not only are Brother Jack’s actions unpredictable, his role in society, and by extension the role of the Brotherhood in society, is never completely fixed. While claiming to help the people, the Brotherhood also finds no problem with abandoning the less powerful for a “greater good.” Even the narrator, part of the Brotherhood, finds it difficult to determine whether the members of the Brotherhood are friends or enemies. However, the one-eyed royals are also the only group of cards that if unified across ranks and suits. Brother Jack advocated the exact same thing in society. The unity of the blacks and the whites, the rich and the poor. Connecting this unity to the unpredictability of Brother Jack and his organization shows that the narrator is wary of the possible effects of uniting people across the boundaries created by society.

The concept of card games is also brought back into the novel by the one-eyed jack, a concept mentioned earlier by the vet who advised the narrator to “play the game, but don’t believe in it.” Through the vet’s word’s, life becomes a game, a game with high stakes, no doubt, but a game nonetheless. But just as the one-eyed jack suggests, there is always a wild card; life cannot be predicted so easily, nor can it be so easily controlled. The game of poker that the one-eyed jack is used in is one based on both luck and skill, clearly indicating that life cannot be controlled by skill alone, as the narrator believed when he first tried to force his way through life in college through hard work and dedication. Yet there is nothing for humans to do other than use what little control they have, leading to the vet’s advice to “play the game.” However, even in playing, the vet tells the narrator, “don’t believe,” hinting to him that the game that society has made life into is nothing more than a sham and therefore, in order to play, he cannot believe. The player must always suspect others while acting himself in order to take part in this grand game of acting and pretending that is life. The key to success in life is the ability to play without being drawn into the lies and to see past into the truth, a truth that the narrator does not find until he stumbles into the world of Rinehart. The wildcards and one-eyed jacks thrown at the narrator throughout him journey are numerous, yet he continues, searching for the truth while trying to play his way through the lies.

battle royal

Invisible Man- Ralph Ellison

In Invisible Man, the narrator is thrust into the world of being used by whites through the battle royal. The humiliation he faced for the sake of the wealthy men’s entertainment was a gateway into his college years. Although he believed that he would be able to achieve something through college, the narrator is once again left at the disposal of wealthy men in power, both black and white, kicked out of college for not being manipulated satisfactorily. Yet even after this, the narrator believes in the possibility of a bright future. It isn’t until the narrator encounter’s Emerson that he finally realizes that he was being used from the very beginning. At that moment, when the narrator decides to change and find a new life, there is hope for a better future. But doesn’t the narrator just fall into the same trap all over again with the brotherhood. Although the battle royal doesn’t literally take place, the narrator is once again manipulated into being controlled by someone else, and everything around him brings back the battle royal for so long ago.

First of all, both processes began with a speech. In the case of the battle royal, it began with his graduation speech in which he asserted that “humility was . . . the very essence of progress.” Those in power around him realized that his words fit their purpose from that moment decided the use him. In the case of the Brotherhood, it all began with his speech during the eviction of the old couple. Just like the powerful whites in the area in the narrator’s childhood, the Brotherhood realized that the narrator’s words matched their purpose and decided to use him. In both case, the ability of those in power to control the narrator came through something that the narrator wanted (the opportunity to continue his education and a job to support himself). However, while the whites and the Brotherhood were both controlling the narrator by asking him to speak for them, the narrator was convince that it was through his own power that he achieved the opportunity, calling his graduation speech a “great success” and being so proud of his capabilities in the Brotherhood that he gets offended when he gets left out of the leaders’ meetings.

Despite the narrator’s lack of suspicion towards those in power and inability to realize that he is being used, he does notice something is abnormal before he speaks in both cases. More specifically, he notices that he is isolated. Before the battle royal, the narrator notices that, in the elevator and waiting to enter the boxing ring, all the other boys seem to be separate from him, excluding him. In the same way, before the narrator’s first speech for the Brotherhood, he notices that Brother Jack takes “two of the other men by the arm and [retreats] to a corner.” The narrator outright states, “I am alone.” This isolation that the narrator feels in both cases continues during the events, as he is left alone in the battle royal and singled out for criticism after his Brotherhood speech, continues throughout his time in college and the Brotherhood as he tries to establish himself and finds no one to depend on other than himself.

Of course, the most obvious parallel of all is the location. A boxing ring. Fighting. A clear hint at what is to come for the narrator. He is never given a chance to live in peace. Rather he is constantly fighting. For the rights of others, for his own rights, for his own identity. A fight that is often fought against the very people that brought him to the boxing ring for his “opportunity.”

and then there was one

Hamlet- Shakespeare

…And then everyone except for Horatio dies. But of course Hamlet can’t go out without a bang, so he brings everything to a close with an entire audience to see the violent and passionate end of his revenge. However, innocent causalities aside, Hamlet is very successful in obtaining what he wanted. When Hamlet is presented with the opportunity to kill Claudius before, he hesitates to go through with the act, deciding instead to kill him in the middle of “some act that has no relish of salvation in ‘t,” hoping that he’ll be able to guarantee Claudius’s imprisonment in hill. Given that Claudius had just created a plan with the evil intentions of killing Hamlet, a plan that also dragged in the deaths of Laertes and Gertrude, adding to the blood already on Claudius’s hands, Hamlet couldn’t have picked a better moment to force Claudius to bare his sins to be judged. To complete his revenge, Hamlet lets the whole world know of his uncle’s deeds, using Horatio as his mouthpiece to tell the world the truth as he knew it. However, even in his dying moments, Hamlet does not forget the destruction he has caused and attempts, to some extent, to repair it.  His kingdom, which would have most likely otherwise been torn by chaos at the sudden change in leader, is more smoothly delivered to Fortinbras with Hamlet’s support at his side.

Oddly enough, the last few minutes of Hamlet’s life are quite productive, a contrast to the Hamlet that can be seen in earlier acts. Hamlet tears himself in two trying to decide whether or not he should go through with his revenge and how he should complete the task. He even gives up an opportunity to kill his uncle earlier. However, in his last minutes, he kills Laertes, forgives Laertes, kills Claudius, assigns Horatio the tasking of telling Hamlet’s story, and secures a future for his kingdom in Fortinbras’s leadership.

Hamlet notes earlier that the “pale cast of thought” causes great plans to “lose the name of action.” By thinking too much, one loses the motivation and drive to go through with the task, a perfect description of Hamlet’s treatment of his revenge mission. Because he wasn’t sure whether he could trust the ghost and didn’t know how he should go about killing his uncle, he began to think and reason to the point that his almost religious passion and determination to live only by his father’s “commandment” was watered down to an uncertainty about the vest course of action. However, right before Hamlet begins his fight with Laertes, he tells Horatio, “Let be.” In this seemingly simple command, Hamlet expresses his desire to put an end to his overthinking. Instead, he plans to allow what happens to happen without questioning. It is with this mindset that Hamlet is able to accomplish everything that he avoided during the rest of the play within the span of a few minutes.

Nonetheless, what Hamlet left behind is nothing short of destruction, causing the death of Polonius’ entire family as well as ridding Denmark of both King and Queen and bringing about the deaths of his friends using the hands of the English while he was at it. The confusion and disorder these actions will cause among the people of Denmark and the surrounding countries is undeniable. The one beam of hope that Hamlet leaves behind is Horatio, the only one standing, left to guide everyone else through the chaos.