Mar 29, 2011

The Morality of Socialism

Overview:

Mary Donovan Hapgood was a woman who was stalwart in her beliefs. After developing her basic beliefs on the socialist agenda and American society on the whole she refused to abandon these ideals and decidedly developed her works based upon these. Perhaps her most informative piece of literature while looking at what she values is her essay “The Vanishing Virtue”. While this has no date attached to it, we can assume that this was written after developing some strong views and making sturdy connections within the socialist party. “The Vanishing Virtue is a very direct piece that is openly scathing of some of the practices associated with the reactions to civil protest that Hapgood was involved in. Out of this criticism, we can see two definitions: crime and virtue.

Crime:

The true crime that Hapgood seems to identify is the lack of courage that we have in society and how society forces us to lose courage. She identifies American industry as a true catalyst for causing society to lose courage because it takes away our individuality. Within her text she openly attacks American industry: “Industrial conditions are perhaps the most destructive of individuality…Here is the best opportunity to crush the individual who raises his head above the herd” (1). Taking away individuality is a dire crime as Hapgood identifies this as a rather significant component of the definition of virtue. The group may make the change but there must be an individual to act as catalyst for the whole group. Socialism advocates for everyone working together, but there is still an individual aspect to life that Hapgood infuses into her ideals of virtue: “There is no courage in groups, only that supplied by individual leaders, for the group has no individuality and is mass minded or mob minded” (2). Clearly crime is not seen in the traditional sense in the least to Hapgood, it is more focused on the desire to oppress and take away the right to freedom of speech. The most prominent display of crime that she gives is the personal anecdote that she gives about Jackson who was an individual and the system oppressed him and beat him down. Clearly, in this instance, Hapgood explicates what she sees as true crime.

Virtue:

The virtue that Hapgood desires of everyone is the courage that she feels is necessary to promote social change. This courage is built up from daring, defiance, and fortitude to withstand the tests of law enforcement and the “evils” that she identifies in society. She seems to openly lay this out very early on in her work: “The real proof of courage, in my opinion, is not to walk up and hit a policeman on the nose, even though one (at least this one) is often tempted to do so. Yet there is necessarily inherent in this quality, courage, a certain amount of defiance, whether it be defiance of the forces of nature of social custom or what is commonly accepted as constituted authority. Added to defiance must be the daring and fortitude also” (1). Virtue is the courage to stand up for what one thinks is right even if one stands alone. As already mentioned, Hapgood sees great merit in the individual and continues to advocate for individual as a part of virtue: “We lack individuality. We are necessarily dependent upon one another in our industrial life” (1).

Strategies:

Hapgood uses various strategies in order to create a sense of activism within her readers that are present in both “The Vanishing Virtue” and No Tears for My Youth. Her appeals to Killingsworth’s tropes are very clearly at work within No Tears for My Youth in order to bring out some of her important themes developed in “The Vanishing Virtue”. One poignant example is in the courtroom: “There, under the American flag, was the small, insignificant form of Judge Thayer, sitting high above his victims. Before him and inside the same cage that held them seven years previously, I saw Sacco and Vanzetti, sitting side by side” (2). There are two main tropes that Hapgood uses within this passage. There is the irony that Judge Thayer is small and insignificant while unjustly determining the fate of Sacco and Vanzetti. One would expect him to be grand and just whilst sitting under the American flag, the assumed ultimate symbol of justice and truth. However, Hapgood increases the distance between Thayer and justice while closing the distance between America and the judicial system. There is also the metaphor of Sacco and Vanzetti as animals or helpless because Hapgood calls it a “cage”. There is an immediate identification of these two men as trapped, helpless beings because of the judicial system. These are two “seemingly unlike things” because a man is not an animal and an animal is not a man, but through this metaphor, Hapgood brings these two things together and allows for them to coexist. By doing this, Hapgood is also emphasizing the crime of taking away individuality. Clearly, if the men are being seen as only animals, their individuality is being stripped and they are being mocked.

Within both texts, Hapgood uses an extremely well tuned sense of both logos and pathos. This logos is present in the direct quotations that Hapgood decides to take from her subjects in both her essay and her book. Inclusion of direct dialogue from the trial allows for the audience to see that both men were making good points and allows us to see the logic in the arguments that the defense was making. Hapgood also shows the lack of logic that was involved in the reasoning of the offense. She does this again in her account of Jackson’s speech and protest. Including passages that simply “make sense”, Hapgood shows how her socialist themes may actually be more logical than the irrational responses of the opposition. The pathos that Hapgood plays to is present in how she paints her heroes. Both Sacco-Vanzetti and Jackson are portrayed in a light that shows them as strong, misunderstood revolutionaries. They are individuals that have poked their heads too far above the rest of the crowd, and now they are facing punishment. Hapgood portrays the men as very sympathetic creatures and emphasizes the dichotomy of their beings by showing how they really were, how she saw them and how their oppressors portrayed them.

Conclusive Paper:

At this point in my research it looks as it my final paper will be mostly based on No Tears for My Youth and “The Vanishing Virtue”. I am planning on asking the following:

How does Mary Donovan Hapgood quite possibly establish and develop the literary tradition of socialist writing? What are her main struggles with society and the aspects of socialism that she would like to infuse into American culture? How does she inspire the masses to follow her ideals?

It will also help me to look into other texts from Hapgood’s earlier years that she did not date. These will portray the development of her voice and themes that she found important to the socialist agenda. This will include texts such as “Big Tim’s Daughter”, “Jerry, The Mine Mule”, and “Why Do Intelligent Women Marry?".

2 comments:

Katharine Yugo said...

Sam,

It seems like you have really got a handle on Hapgood and her ideas. One point you made that I find interesting is that when Hapgood criticizes industry for causing people to lose courage she focuses on America in particular. It makes me wonder what is special about American industrialization, since this was a movement not happening here alone, but also abroad. Were socialist ideals more accepted in Europe and/or Asia and/or Africa? I don't know if this is a line of inquiry relevant to your paper, but since you pointed it out it piqued my curiosity. Is there a country or group of people she thinks Americans should emulate?

From looking at your blog post it is clear to me that you have no problem analyzing information multiple ways. I hope you are able to use this gift in your archival paper. Good luck!

Belle Kim said...

Sam,

I read your blog post with a lot of interest, as we are both covering Hapgood. The idea that Hapgood wants to promote a universal virtue of courage so that it gives rise to activism is very interesting.

Your section on literary strategies makes me wonder what appeal she principally uses--that of logos, pathos or ethos--in her works. It might be useful for you to read other passages from her autobiography in order to further your understanding of the Sacco-Vanzetti case and to find out how she set the tradition for the socialist style. Other questions you may want to address might be, how does she position herself as a socialist in her works and why? How did she first become involved in socialism? How does she view the movement as a whole? These are questions that I think could only be answered by looking at her autobiography--after all, who better to ask what she thought than herself?

Anyways, good job on this post. GOOD LUCK!

Post a Comment