Destini Beckham

Children Literature

In the book by Gertrude Chandler Warner The Box -Car Children landscape is used both as a safety net and as an obstacle for the characters to overcome. Using both realistic struggles and strengths to counter the seemingly idealistic version of the children’s world, forcing the reader to balance the fantasy mindset and the reality the character’s find themselves in, making it more immersive. This is done by using the landscape as a sort of barrier between getting what they need while at the same time making a pathway to get what they want, all the while living a life of childhood whimsy.

In the book The Box -Car Children the hill that lays in between the freight car and the city though usually showcase as a good thing is shown to be an inconvenience when one of the siblings fall dangerously ill as seen in the passage that states

  “Nobody ever knew how fast he ran down the hill. Even in his famous race, Henry hardly touched his present speed. He was so thoroughly frightened that he never stopped to notice how quickly the doctor seemed to understand what was wanted. He did not even notice that he did not have to tell the doctor which way to drive his car in order to reach the hill. When the car reached the road at the base of the hill, Dr. McAllister said shortly, "Stay here in the car," and disappeared up the hill alone” ( Warner, “Trouble”)

This passage takes place directly after discovering that Olivia, one of the sisters, was deathly sick and needed more treatment than any of the young siblings could provide. Leading to Henry having to run but to the town above the hill in order to get help, with the amount of urgency being even further emphasized by the phrase “Henry hardly touched his present speed”  ( Warner, “Trouble”)  in comparison to the race he had run prior, showcasing that at least in Henry’s mind this is a matter of life or death. Which the hill would only prove to be an hindrance towards as even though it’s downhill instead of uphill, the terrain would greatly affect his speed for if he runs too fast on such a surface it would be more likely for him to trip than it would be on level terrain. Notwithstanding running downhill would likely cause more energy to be used up causing him to slow down, yet at the same time, the hill is a pathway to the Doctor who rushes to help making it more of an benevolent landscape as a whole. This in turn makes it more engaging for even a younger reader would still see sickness as quite an urgent matter needing to be taken care of, with any obstacle that is a hindrance to aid no matter how small being seen as something  huge like Henry having to run down the hill. The obstacle of the hill also helps break the illusion of whimsy by having the hill placed in between forest the and the town which in turn could make it more immersive, the article by Carol Billman “Reading and Mapping: Directions in Children's Fantasy” specifically where he states “of the fairy world existing in the root structures of the flowers and trees in the garden. This view helps readers of the story square the adjacent and simultaneous existences of "real" and fairy realms”( Billman 43).This passage through talking about the use of illustration could also  be use to showcases the need of having elements of the whimsy and the realistic, like the hill being an obstacle helps to ground the reader in both thought mindsets. Allowing it to be more engaging because there’s realistic elements to cling to while letting the whimsy occur. Such lightheartedness is seen through how they think of using the landscape that surrounds them, to support their needs and grant them security instead of being outright afraid of it.

During the book The Box Car Children, the main landscape surrounding the freight car and the freight car itself proves to be a source of comfort and shelter that the children desperately need as soon in the passage that states  “She could not stir. Faintly outlined among the trees, Jess saw an old freight or box car. Her first thought was one of fear; her second, hope for shelter. As she thought of shelter, her feet moved, and she stumbled toward it” ( Warner,“Shelter” ).  The context of this passage is that there’s an encroaching storm, with their only shelter at that moment being a haystack that likely wouldn’t hold up well in the storm and even if it did, it would get very damp and cold. So, the forest and the freight car’s presence as is directly stated in the passage provides “hope” ( Warner, “Shelter” ) , since it provides safety from the storm that threatened them all. Even without the freight car, the forest landscape itself provides safety as the leaves and branches especially of such quantity would lead to very little water actually managing to land on the children, as well as being a barrier against the wind. With  the freight car only increasing the shelter quality as it’s a more secure hiding spot, and a proper barrier between them and anything man or beast that may wish to harm them, since it has walls on all sides with a door that can be closed.  This in turn would allow the children a sense of comfort since it in their mind protects them from those that may wish to drag them to their grandfather due to the density of the woods making them hard to spot, allowing them to put aside their main fear that were plaguing them up to this point. The forest landscape as a whole  is immersive in most children’s tales, usually due to it being a frightening obstacle, via having that expectation  of danger be subverted it makes it more immersive. As it shows a more realistic view of the forest with it being at worst benevolent but never outright malicious, the landscape is also used to explore the children’s imagination and the way they cope through what should be hardship.

In The Box -Car Children  it is shown that the children use the landscape to escape the reality of the situation and dive into whimsy fantasy-like mindset as shown in the passage where Jess pleads to Henry " "Please, Henry," said Jess excitedly. "I could make this old freight car into the dearest little house, with beds, and chairs, and a table—and dishes—" ( Warner“Shelter” ). Through this passage, it is shown that Jess is planning to use the landscape around them to essentially play house, eventually doing so by going to the garbage dump. Where they would find the dishes, and basic furniture for the Box Car, while also using the pine needles from the forest, and hay from the haystack they slept in during their first night to make their beds. Showing that they’re actively disregarding the reality of them being homeless and on their own, by thinking of ways to reclaim what they lost. Instead of dwelling on the horrors of their situation and the dangers of it, fully embracing the younger children's whimsical mindset.  This in turn is more immersive for a younger audience as they often view the landscape even in the more frightening times as something more imaginative like a stick becoming a sword and so on and so forth. Such child like way of seeing the landscape is something that is also mentioned in the article by Billman “Reading and Mapping: Directions in Children's Fantasy” specifically where he states “Finding one's place in a world or in a book is what I want to turn to now, for this task is, I suggest, fundamental when children read or hear stories. In other ways -- like readers of all ages -- they find their places metaphorically” (Billman 43). Through this passage, it is shown that children have one thing similar to all readers, though in more degrees, viewing landscapes and descriptions in more than what is put on the page. Which in turn would enhance the immersive experience, as their brain pictures the landscape in more creative ways, though in this book there’s less opportunity to do so. Seeing the children view the landscape in such a way could create more relatability and hence more immersion for the reader .Especially since the children see the landscape as other children would, full of wonder and possibilities instead of the reality of the situation which is often a lot worse than what the children perceive it as. So the younger readers would attach themselves to that aspect and perhaps feel like they're playing alongside them.

The novel  The Box Car Children portrays landscape as a balance between an obstacle the children have to avoid and something that protects the children. Done by using typical struggles like sickness to make the landscape a huddle, while also using the need for shelter to make the landscape a blessing. With these realistic situations making the novel more immersive since it breaks  up the whimsy of the children’s imagination and grounds it into something realistic. Which, in turn, shows that having realistic elements in a fantasy world is a necessity when it comes to landscape, to further ground the readers in the moment.

Works Cited

Billman, Carol. “Reading and Mapping Directions in Children Fantasy”.

                                                                                                    John Hopkins University Press, 1982, pp 40-46.

                                                                                                   Warner,  Gertrude. The Box-Car Children.  Rand McNally & Company 1924.

Destini Beckham

British Apo

Serfdom or the act of being a servant was once a very common practice in the United Kingdom and across Europe as a whole; such a practice has been done away with centuries back. However, during the time that it was in practice, it was a source of great tension throughout Europe, being one of the contributing factors that led to many of the peasants' revolts during the medieval era. Serfdom, being a contributing if not one of the main contributing factors, could be found in how many areas in Europe broke out into revolt over this topic, being a central point of division between lords and peasants. The importance of serfdom in the context is also shown through the legal bindings and or customs that were placed upon those in and around serfdom, being a part of the cause for the tensions.  On the same line, the likelihood for serfdom being part of the cause for the revolts could be seen in how the peasants, before the revolts even started, tried to push against serfdom through finding loopholes around it. With all these creating such an amount of tension that violence was the inevitable outcome of serfdom.

During the medieval times in England as well as throughout Europe, many revolts arose, which had serfdom as the stated cause of at least some of the tension. The outspread revolts in Europe due to this topic is shown in the article “European yeomanries: a non-immiseration model of agrarian social history, 1350—1800”  by William W Hagan (2011), specifically where it states

“the arrival of bubonic plague in the mid-fourteenth century enabled the peasantries of the Mediterranean, Western European, English, and western German regions to shed (or, at any rate, greatly loosen) the legal bonds of medieval serfdom. Mostly this was a negotiated process, but in part it entailed peasant revolt” (William Hagan 261-262).

This shows two reasons for the leading pleasant revolt, with one being the plague that was in a sense the catalyst for the domino effect that led to the revolts. As even though the plague was by and large a tragic and mortifying event, it only brought forth new opportunities that were before unthought of, as due to the spread of the plague more and more regions had that chance. The tie in between the revolts and the plague is further showcased in the article  “CHAPTER 3 The Long Thirteenth Century: Structural Crisis, Conjunctural Catastrophe” by Alexander Anievas and Kerem Nişancioğlu (2015) specifically where it states “the Black Death ushered in a new era of profound social dislocations and economic change” (81). This shows further evidence that the plague caused a great shift in society itself, changing even so much as the social hierarchy in a very extreme sense, likely never seen before, allowing for different ways of thinking. Making the whole situation ripe for a revolt, which led to the ability to fight against the terms of serfdom, which will be discussed later,  and in some instances led to violence, tying in to the claim that serfdom was a cause for the revolts throughout Europe in the medieval times. A specific  instance of different places revolting due  to serfdom is seen in the article “The German and Catalan Peasant Revolt” by Paul Freudman (1993), specifically where it states, “While the German peasants were suppressed and never again mounted such an intense or broadly coordi-nated movement, the Catalan rebels achieved the official abolition of servitude in 1486” (39). This passage makes reference to both the German and Catalan revolts happening during the medieval period around the same time as each other. While also having two completely different outcomes, where one succeeds in getting rid of servitude earlier than many other places, but the other one fails badly as their revolt was essentially crushed. However, what made these two revolts similar was the fact that they both dealt with fighting against serfdom, once again proving that the revolts that had to deal with serfdom didn’t occur in just one place. The reason serfdom even stayed in place as long as it did would likely have to do with the legality and customs surrounding serfdom in many different societies.

There were many legal bindings  and customs surrounding serfdom that made pushing away from it more difficult, creating tension that could lead to a revolt. Some traditions surrounding serfdom can be found in the article “The German and Catalan Peasant Revolt” by Paul Freudman, specifically where it states

“Above all, Catalan unfree peasants protested what were called "the bad customs," a term whose widespread use demonstrates the limits of euphemism in the Middle Ages. Among the bad customs was the requirement of manumission in order to move away from a lord's jurisdiction” (Paul Freudman 48).

This passage shows that the servants, aka the “unfree peasants,” had to jump through many hurdles in order to  hope for their next generation to be free from the Lords. Thanks to the process having customs/ traditions at its core, which would be hard for peasants to fight against. This would in turn, inevitably cause tension between the Lords and peasants due to the binding nature of the customs.  The legality surrounding serfdom would also lead to well-to-do peasants wanting to change the restraints of serfdom, which is shown in the article “Peasant Movements in England before 1381” by R.H Hilton (1949) specifically where it states

“these men must have regarded the restrictions of serfdom in a very different light from the poorer peasants whose legal status they shared. Most irritating to them must have been the hindrances to accumulation, rather than the fear of starvation. Consequently, and especially during the period of seigneurial withdrawal from active participation in productive activity the issue of the right to buy and sell land freely comes to the fore” ( R.H Hilton  131).

This passage deals with the legalized restrictions surrounding serfdom and land owning, putting it to the forefront of the reasoning that the more wealthy peasants would want to strive towards the same goal as the poorer among them. With the goal in this case being to bring an end to serfdom so the wealthier peasants would have the right to do with land as they pleased without having to jump through hurdles in the process. With this common goal uniting the peasantry, though for different reasons, it’s not hard to see that when they don’t achieve their goal peacefully, they could proceed to unite their forces and lead a revolt. That is fueled by their common desire to get rid or at least change the rules concerning servanthood.

Even before the peasants' revolts took place, in part fighting against serfdom, there were other avenues the peasants took to bypass the strict hold serfdom had on their lives, setting the cornerstone for the possibility of bigger action to be taken in the future. Such an avenue is shown in the article “Peasant Movements in England before 1381” by R.H Hilton, specifically where it states

“Groups of tenants were only able to find a legal basis for resistance to claims by the lord for increased services by denying that they were of ordinary villein status and so subject to the lord's arbitrary will. So in some cases they claimed to be protected as tenants of the ancient demesne of the Crown, in other cases to be of long-established free condition.” ( R.H Hilton 125).

This sort of loophole, that a likely significant number of peasants found, relied on the basis of them claiming that they weren’t of servant blood, instead being either descendants of the crown in some capacity or merely being of a lineage that either never or at least had a long gap of being freeborn. Such a claim would only be made by those who were, in at least some sense, desperate to push against the restrictions and demands of serfdom, in order to be free from the lord’s demands. Due to this, there would likely be an increase in tension between peasants and lords that could rather easily grow into something greater, especially for the peasants that weren’t able to claim such a status, laying the groundwork for a revolt. Peasants in this era even used religion to push against the very idea of serfdom, as shown in the article  “The German and Catalan Peasant Revolt” by Paul Freudman, specifically where it states

“As early as the thirteenth century, German serfdom was the object of attacks on the basis of

Christian equality and the significance of Christ's sacrifice. These denunciations

went beyond commonplace laments over human sinfulness to the point of

asserting the illegitimacy of lordship that violated the teachings of biblical law” (Paul Freudman 44).

This passage shows that the peasants  in early Germany used their religion to try to push against and find loopholes in the very idea of servanthood and serfdom in general. Likely basing it off of the idea found in the bible that “all men are created equal” and other passages throughout, it is uncertain which passages specifically they used at that time. Regardless, it was used to show that the very foundation of servanthood/ serfdom  stood in complete opposition to  what their faith teaches, which was very important at that time due to how crucial religion was to societies during that time period. Knowing this it makes perfect sense that they would try to use religion to loosen the holds that being a servant had on them, despite the fact that they didn’t succeed at the time. Their unsuccessfulness would lead to growing tensions between the two groups, which in turn would lead to their unsuccessful attempts at a peasant revolt later on.

As shown throughout this piece, serfdom was one of the reasons that the peasants' revolts took place, which is shown through both the spread of the peasants' revolts throughout Europe that had serfdom as one of the causes, and the laws/ traditions that were found that had to deal with serfdom which created rising tensions between the peasants and Lords of the time. This was also seen through the loopholes the peasants attempted to find to bypass servanthood, hence showing that the topic was a matter of great tension back in the day. Even before the revolts took place. Through this lens, one can better comprehend the impact that servanthood had in the medieval ages and what it meant for peasants back in the day.

Work Cited

Anievas, Alexander, and Kerem Nişancioğlu. “The Long Thirteenth Century: Structural Crisis, Conjunctural Catastrophe.” How the West Came to Rule: The Geopolitical Origins of Capitalism, Pluto Press, 2015, pp. 64–90

Freudman Paul, “The German and Catalan Peasant Revolts”. The American Historical   Review Vol. 98, No. 1. Feb., 1993.  pp. 39-54.

Hilton R.H, “Peasant Movements in England before 1381”. The Economic History Vol. 2,.No. 2 1949. pp. 117-136.

Hagen William W, “European yeomanries: a non-immiseration model of

agrarian social history, 1350—1800”. The Agricultural History Review

Vol. 59, No. 2. 2011, pp. 259-265.

Destini Beckham

British Lit

Perspective in a novel, as any author or dedicated reader would tell you, matters and should be chosen carefully before one even lifts up a pen. With this choice, there are quite a few different ways to portray it, especially if it’s done in third person, which is the  point of view the novel The Lonely Londoners by Sam Selvon (2006) is written in. Though he does  it in a very interesting fashion, switching between characters through two different avenues, either by having Moses in a sense tell the other character's tale or by simply switching the next scene to a different character temporarily. Whichever means is chosen, it affects the story in significant ways, for instance, it allows a complete tone shift, seeing how one character reacts to a scenario or event compared to how others would, while also accomplishing worldbuilding. It also allows the reader to view a conflict in a more neutral environment, unlike how it would be if the reader were stuck in one head or another.  On the topic of conflict, the readers get to experience multiple internal conflicts, showing the reader the actual reasoning for a character’s flaws instead of only being told about it or viewing it through another lens. Something this book does differently than some others who work with third person is using the different perspectives to quite literally have another character solve a plot point no matter how small, that a different character started. Specifically, one that most would think would be solved by the initial character, the plot point followed. All these ways of playing with perspective allowed the reader to get a deeper understanding of the individual characters in the novel.

Thanks to the different perspectives that the  novel The Lonely Londoners plays with, the reader gets to see how two different characters react to the same scene that lies outside of  any initial conflict. Such an occurrence is sprinkled throughout the novel, happening even towards the very beginning, with one such occurrence being where it states

“Moses take him round the block to the next building. When they enter a kind of atmosphere hit Galahad hard so that he had to stand up against the wall for a minute. It aint have no place in the world that exactly like a place where a lot of men get together to look for work and draw money from the Welfare State while they ain’t working. Is a kind of place where hate and disgust and avarice and malice and sympathy and sorrow and pity all mix up” (Sam Selvon 27).

This scene showcases two different characters by the names of Moses and Galahad, which occurs right after Galahad was refused any sort of work and so was sent to the unemployment office. Where Moses doesn’t even bother warning Galahad about the environment he was about to be exposed to, almost like he is numbed to it, and so he just assumes that it wouldn’t affect Galahad so terribly. Meanwhile, Galahad is left stunned by the environment of misery and woe that surrounds him, being overwhelmed by seemingly just how void of any sort of positive or neutral feeling resides.  All the while, who we assume to be Moses describes the place to us in a very matter-of-fact manner, in a way without much care of what is going on around him, viewing it as simply a place for the lazy or those who hit rock bottom. These two polar opposite reactions to the same environment are, by and large, due to the novel freely moving from one character perspective to another, allowing us to see both the numb Moses and the overwhelmed Galahad without any set in stone judgment being placed on either of them. With the opposite being likely to occur if instead it was set in the perspective of only Moses of Galahad. This, in turn, allows for more characterization for each character as it shows how prolonged exposure to such an environment could numb a person, like it did with Moses, while a new person can be overwhelmed with it all, like Galahad. Such an showcasing of an environment does wonders for worldbuilding as shown in the article “Immigration, Postwar London, and the Politics of Everyday Life in Sam Selvon's Fiction’ by Rebecca Delver (2002) specifically where it states about The Lonely Londoners “by inserting-in the compelling voices of the Caribbean migrants-descriptions of the living conditions of poor migrant workers, whose experiences are fast becoming constitutive of London life. ” (116). This in turn would explain the numbness felt by Moses and the borderline horror of it all, as since Moses had been there for a considerable while, he had accepted that’s just how London is, while Galahad, new to all this is left bewildered by it all. Still shocked about the difference between what he likely was told about London versus how it actually is. Showing that one day, Galahad might feel the same as Moses due to him accepting that’s just how things are in London, showing the characterization pipeline that might occur. The playing with perspective also shows how one’s environment affects external conflicts in the novel.

The play with perspective allows the reader a more nuanced view of conflict, where you see the same conflict from two different viewpoints without being in the head of either one. Such an occurrence occurs throughout The Lonely Londoners, with one instance being specifically where it states

“Is all right, I tell you,” Lewis say. “Tell she to forget all about it.”

“But I tell you Agnes not here,” Tanty say. “What happen, you beat she again last night?”

“How you mean  she ain’t here?” Lewis say, and he looking all about in the room.”

“Which part she gone?” he ask Tanty.”

“I don’t know,” Tany say. “She didn’t come here at all. But if she left you she have a right to” (Sam Selvon 55).

This  scene takes place after Lewis realizes that his wife Agnes isn’t home, and so he goes to Tanty’s place searching for her. This is where we see their viewpoints in the scenario differ drastically, where the heart of the conflict lies in Lewis acting nonchalant about the abuse he had been actively dishing out to Agnes, while Tanty seemingly acts disgusted about what he did to his wife. With her easily tying together the threads between him coming to her home  and Agnes having seemingly gone missing, and responding to him without a single ounce of sympathy. All the while Lewis just wants Agnes to come back, not seeing or simply not caring about how horrific what he did was, instead he just wants everything to go back to normal, as he seems to think that’s what always was done before.  Thanks to not being in any one person’s head in this scene it gives the conflict more significance so back in the day, it was originally written with an air of flexibility where the reader can decide for themselves whose right or wrong. This, in turn, allows the reader to get a better grasp and a better read on the character, how they view him. This sort of play with perspective also doubles in allowing what the article “Sam Selvon's "Harlequin Costume": Moses Ascending, Masquerade, and the Bacchanal of Self-Creolization” by Swift Dickenson (1996) which is showing the change of the environment, which is shown where it states “its treatment of "the new reality of life in Britain for the new immigrants from the non-Western world" (Jussawalla and Dasenbrock 101) (69). This links up to the conflict shown in the novel passage referenced above because it shows that the way things used to work in where they’re from doesn’t quite work the same  as to where they’ve moved too. Allowing for the two different perspectives in this conflict to  make sense as it could be that were Lewis and Tanty are from such a thing that Lewis did most wouldn’t bat an eye at, which is confirmed a bit later on in the novel. Making such a loose perspective swift near crucial, specifically with the time period it was from, is near crucial as it allows a more vivid view of the changes that has occurred and how each character has adapted to it. Allowing for further characterization as adaptability and pushback  says a lot about one's character. The difference of perspectives don’t only just expand on external conflict but internal ones as well.

Due to the play with perspective that The Lonely Londoners explores, the reader gets to see inside the minds of more than one character, showing the individual internal conflicts on a personal level instead of just on an external level being told to us by others. This can be seen throughout the piece, but for this case, Gallahad will take the central focus, specifically where he states

“Sir Galahad was a fellar like that, and he was trying hard to give Moses the feeling that everything all right, that he could take care of himself, that he don’t want help for anything. So that same morning when they finish eating, Moses tell him that he would go with him to help find him a work, but Galahad say: “Don’t worry man, I will make out for myself” (Sam Selvon 19).

Through this perspective, the reader gets to see the real reason why Galahad was acting all carefree when he first appeared, as well as here. Since it is told to us through seemingly Gallahad himself that the reasoning for his big act is that he wants to seem tough, or at least possibly in his head man enough to get through life on his own. To the point of politely pushing against those who are simply trying to help him. This gives Galahad a point of internal conflict, as the reader will see later, and that is implied here, he does actually require Moses’s assistance, but due to his mindset, he feels like he needs to reject it.  This also gives him an added layer of characterization, as it would hint at the way he was raised or perhaps prior circumstances in his life leading him to believe that he should never rely on others for help. This amount of depth might of not been gleaned if it was just in Moses’s point of view, as he could simply see Galahad as being ignorant of everything. It also gives an inner lot on the flaws of Galahad, which is something according to the article “The Island and the World: Kinship, Friendship and living together in selected writings of Sam Selvon” by Alison Donnel (2012) specifically where it states “Selvon never eulogises his characters; he shows their flaws and failings as much as their hopes and achievements. All the same, in the strained conditions of immigrant life, the moments of intimacy and companionship. “(63-64).  Through this passage, it is shown that Selvon prefers showing a more dimensional character with layers to their personality, instead of a blank canvas of only good or bad traits like what might be seen in an old Disney Princess movie. With this goal in mind, the third-person perspective  serves him well since, as shown previously, internal conflict from multiple characters can play a factor. The use of different perspectives could also be used to solve or continue plot points from other characters.

With the way perspective moves so fluidly in The Lonely Londoners, it allows for a very unique way to deal with plot by having a character pass on a plot point or thread of their own to another character that may or not be picked up again later. Such an example can be seen where it states

“Moses pick up a sharp thing who was talking to two English fellars and he takes her to the yard afterwards the girl tell him how she used to take heroin at one time and and she show him the marks on her arm where she inject the kick Moses stay with the thing regularly for a week then he get tired  \and tell Cap he have a girl if he interested” ( Sam Selvon 96-97).

With this perspective, the reader sees firsthand how slightly loose on his morals Moses is, as we see him choose a woman at a random due to her looks, and seemingly takes her home. Only to seemingly abandon her after noticing how she used to be an addict, merely putting up with her for a week until passing her off unto someone he knows doesn’t treat women right, once he got bored with her. The language here is also very interesting as Moses seems to view the woman as a mere object due to the dehumanizing language the author use when talking about her. This use of passing the girl off to Cap and having a tiny section dedicated to Cap after this passage  shows that he was used as a mere way to tie up Moses’s unwanted thread aka the girl. It also shows a layer of characterization for both characters involved as it shows us how unattached and uncaring  Moses seems to be towards girls in general, as well as solidifying the fact that  Cap will be willing to essentially use any girl if given a chance, revealing the sexist attitudes of both of them. Showcasing first-hand what the chapter “In the Big City the Sex Life Gone Wild”: Migration, Gender, and Identity in Sam Selvon’s The Lonely Londoners” Ashley Dawson (2007) says about sexism and the novel specifically, where it states “ the novel also lays out the flaws of a resistant cultural nationalism grounded in misogynistic, homophobic bonding between

men” (34). The idea of their misogynistic/ sexist views being a point of connection between the men in the novel is shown most clearly through the novel passage referenced previously, as it’s clear to see that both Moses and Cap feel so connected through their views of women that they seem to unashamedly pass them around like gum. Not caring what the women in this scenario may think, which could either be interpreted as humorous or as a problem, the chapter is suggesting it does. This is made even stronger by it being in the third perspective since it allows the reader not to be bogged down by one character’s excuses, leaving it to the reader to make their own moral judgment. This, in turn, could lead to different interpretations of the characters in this scene and in others throughout the novel, which in turn gives an opportunity for deeper characterization of each individual character.

As shown the novel The Lonely Londoners by Sam Selvon uses its loose  play with third-person perspective to give more depth to the individual characters of the novel. Through many different avenues throughout the piece such as allowing a fluidity of perspective in one set scene that exists outside of any present conflict. Doing this by showing the reader two vastly different reactions to one setting, through the lens of two different people. The novel also takes the opportunity given by the play with perspective, to make external conflict stand in a more neutral ground, so to speak, hence allowing the reader more freedom of morality than if they were stuck in one person's perspective. On the topic of conflict the perspective fluidity also serves to allow the reader more free access to individual characters' internal conflict due to being able to float, in a sense to several different persons' heads. Which in turn gives the reader a more in a way accurate look of a character than if they were just reliant on what other characters say about the character in question. With the perspective being as fluid as it’s, it also allows a more interesting sort of way to resolve any hanging threads for a character by simply passing it onto another character, in the course of a scene. This allows a more deeper understanding of both the characters through seeing how both are involved act about this exchange of sorts. With the knowledge about how a seemingly simple choice of what perspective to put a novel could impact a novel such as this, it could lead to an perhaps deeper appreciation for an author's choice. Which could in turn lead to readers playing more attention to what lens they’re being forced to view a novel in. and how that’s affecting their view of the characters and the environment as a whole. Leading them to be more aware of any sort of intentional manipulation on the author’s part, trying to nudge them in one way or another, which could in turn open up the floor for conversation about whether the viewpoint they’re being led to see the world in is the correct way to view the novel, or why are they being made to believe it’s. Allowing, in part, though this may be a bit optimistic, for a rise in critical literacy thinking about novels and their history.

Work Cited

Dawson, Ashley, “ “In the Big City the Sex Life Gone Wild”: Migration, Gender, and Identity in Sam Selvon’s The Lonely Londoners.” Mongrel Nation:

Diasporic Culture and the Making of Postcolonial Britain, University of  Michigan Press, 2007, pp 27-48.

Donne,l Allison, “The Island and the World: Kinship, Friendship and living together in selected writings of Sam Selvon”. Journal of West Indian  

Literature, vol.20, no.2, 2012, pp 54-69.

Dickinson, Swift, “Sam Selvon's "Harlequin Costume": Moses Ascending, Masquerade, and the Bacchanal of Self-Creolization”. MELUS,

vol. 21, no , 1996 pp 69-108.

Dryers, Rebecca, “Immigration, Postwar London, and the Politics of Everyday Life in Sam Selvon's Fiction”. Critical Critique, no.52, 2002

pp 108-144.

Selvon, Sam, The Lonely Londoners. Penguin Books 2006.

Destini Beckham

British Novels

Dreams are powerful, especially when used by an author who is skilled with the pen. Powerful for what? Some may wonder and the answer is it depends, sometimes they’re used just to give insight into one or more characters like their darkest fears or inner desires. Other times authors will play with dreams as a clever method of foreshadowing. Either way, dreams are powerful in novels and sometimes there are links between novels being connected by the dreams. For instance, they could be foreshadowing the same instance as is seen with Wide Sargasso Sea By Jean Rhys (1999)  and Jane Eyre by Charlotte Bronte (2015) whose both main characters Jane and Antoinette dream of the destruction of Thornfield. They also have in a way similar dreams of desires both having dreams of longing for others.

In both Wide Sargasso Sea By Jean Rhys and Jane Eyre by Charlotte Bronte, the main characters have a dream that foreshadows the downfall of Thornfield but in different perspectives. First of course I’ll start with the novel that started it all as it were, which is Jane Eyre by Charlotte Bronte. This scene takes place a bit over midway into the novel where Jane is telling Rochester about her dreams a bit before the marriage ceremony. Specifically, I believe this is the third dream she tells him and a part of it goes as such, “I dreamt another dream sir; that Thornfield Hall was a dreary ruin, the retreat of bats and owls. I thought that of all the stately front nothing remained but a shell-like wall” (Charlotte Bronte 279). Now, this though the reader wouldn’t know of it until towards the end is a clever foreshadowing of Thornfield demise. The reason this dream takes more I suppose one could say passive approach towards the whole thing considering the subject matter is that Jane isn’t actually there when Thornfield gets burned down. Instead, she hears about it from a Butler when she goes to reunite with Rochester after rejecting St John’s marriage proposal. Who then proceeds to tell her about Thornfield being burned down by Rochester’s wife Antoinette or Bertha as she’s known in this novel. Which would of course lead to the sort of ruins as seen in the dream. Now let’s switch perspectives and novels respectively looking at  Wide Sargasso Sea by Jean Rhys. Seeing a dream of Thornfield demise through the lens of Antoinette the wife of Rochester herself who dreams that “She was surrounded by a gilt flame but I knew her. I dropped the candle I was carrying and it caught the end of a tablecloth and I saw the flames shoot up” (Jean Rhys 112). This, in turn, foreshadows Thornfield's demise though more immediately than is seen in Jane Eyre as nearly right after the demise occurs. The foreshadowing is made evident in her dropping the candle adding to the flames of the already burning house which we take to be Thornfield. Taking a more active role in the dream than Jane did in hers which is more than just being two different authors' different takes in the same scenario, instead, it is because Antoinetta takes a more active role in the destruction of Thornfield being the one who literally lights the match as it were. Though this version of the dream of Thornfield does more than just foreshadow the event, it is the driving force that causes her to commit the arson and practically suicide. As Antoinetta takes it to be a sort of a vision of what must occur so she proceeds to act it out. Now, this sort of take on dreams especially with Antoinette, someone with mental illness isn’t one I quite fancy as it plays into the common trope with people that have mental illness being villains. Which was already showcased plenty in Jane Eyre itself by having Antoinette be the reason the marriage couldn’t originally go through and the reason Thornfield burns down. Even playing with the idea that the mentally ill only needs the smallest of triggers like a dream perhaps to set them off. While this may happen sometimes in reality it seems to often be the only path fiction takes and with a book such as Wide Sargasso Sea by Jean Rhys where a good majority of it is spent on humanizing Antoinette, taking that path provides a huge disservice to the novel. Rather it could have been just a need for vengeance and deep despair that could have led her to commit arson and in the end take her life. Moreover the use of having a dream to be what pushes her over the edge as it were could be seen as madness more than mental illness. The dangers of that is expressed in Elizabeth J Donaldson from her article “The Corpus  of the Madwoman; Toward a Feminist Disability Studies Theory of Embodiment and Mental Illness” where she states “Indeed, one could argue, when madness is used as a metaphor for feminist rebellion, mental illness itself is erased” (617). Where the aforementioned rebellion comes in is the burning of the house that has held her captive for so long and with tying it into the dream makes the connection that it was an madness act even harder to overlook. With that in mind the potential that it could be seen as  madness not mental illness could in of itself dehumanize Antoinette which is the opposite of what the novel had been trying hard to achieve.  As for the foreshadowing dream in Jane eyre that I have pointed out here, I have no gripe as in my eyes it is a clever use of foreshadowing the sort that I would be tempted to use in my novel.

Desires in both novels have one common thread when portrayed in dreams, they both speak on the desires of the main character to be with someone, specifically with someone that the character feels close to. This is shown in Jane eyre Charlotte Bronte as she is telling Rochester her dreams before the marriage is supposed to take place, with one of them going as such “I thought, sir, that you were on the road a long way before me; and I strained to every nerve to overtake you, and made effort on effort to utter your name and entreat you to stop –but my movements were fettered” (278). The very act of straining to get to Rochester in her dreams, doing everything in her power to do so speaks of how strong her desire is to be with Rochester. Someone who she’s deeply in love with but is destined not to marry until the end. Which is alluded to with her being unable to reach him quite yet as they aren’t to be together for quite a while yet. The dream also serves as a hint of foreshadowing or a bad omen at the very least as she would soon be restrained from being with her by the appearance of Antoinette herself. Leading Jane to leave Rochester for a good amount of time as not doing so would have gone against her very morals hence creating a barrier against them. Yet even though that is the case, Jane still desires for him as she is apart for a time being which I find a bit strange as during her time away she comes into money making living alone a possibility. Even though in the novel that is seen as strong love it could have also been hinting towards how more appealing at the time succumbing to the patriarchy is as that is where she would be truly happy hence keeping her desire strong . This sort of take is along the same lines as Terry Eagleton article “Jane Eyre from Myths of Power; A Marxist Society of the Brontes” specifically where it states “ Whether she likes it or not, Jane finally comes to have power over Rochester. Her ultimate relation to him is a complex blend of independence (she comes to him on her own terms, financially self sufficient), submissiveness, and control” (531). This in turn gives Jane what she wants as she is able to help Rochester hence the sort of control she has over him, while also being loved by him. In  Wide Sargasso Sea  By Jean Rhys Antoinette also has a dream of desire for Tia after the dreaded fire takes place. Who she can’t any longer be with, even though she has the dream of desire for Tia it is evident that she has less love for Tia than Jane had for Rochester as shown where Antoinette states “Then not so far off, I saw Tia and her mother and I ran to her, for she was all that was left of my life as it had been. We had eaten the same food, slept side by side, bathed in the same river” (Jean Rhys 27). Notice how there was no mention of any memory of true friendship even though arguably there was a moment of semi-friendship in the novel when Antoinette was semi-reluctant to take Tia’s dress off. Though none of that seems to matter as instead, it is the need of the familiar that drives her to Tia as her entire life is turned upside down after the fire. Leaving Antoinette grasping at straws for anything to ground herself to her past which will become even more crucial to her later on in the novel. Tia herself isn’t seemingly blind to this either; she casts stones at Antoinette causing her harm and breaking their ties permanently (Jean Rhys 27). Then we never hear of Tia again leaving her fate a mystery. Breaking both the bonds of a sort of friendship permanently and breaking Antoinette's grips on her past which will only break further sending her into madness.

Dreams of foreshadowing and desire are present in the novels of  Wide Sargasso Sea By Jean Rhys and Jane Eyre by Charlotte Bronte. Showing both the prelude to destruction and the longing for others to be by their side. That all is well and good but why does that matter at all? Well seeing that  Wide Sargasso Sea By Jean Rhys is technically a prequel while at the time in some instances happening alongside Jane Eyre by Charlotte Bronte seeing the similarities in the two could push others to read either novel again in order to find more as it could intrigue some. More importantly, though I would argue, is seeing how the two novels handle the same event as in the Thornfield burning as through Antoinette's dream we see the cause and afterward the action of the burning while Jane only gives us an outward perspective. While yes would provoke more intrigue from the readers it also gives us through the different perspective offered by Wide Sargasso Sea a more personal insight into Antoinette’s mental state at the time. This in turn allows the reader a deeper understanding of Antoinette while opening the floodgates for conversation of which novel handled it better and if either handled it properly in the first place

Works Cited

                                         Charlotte Bronte, Jane Eyre. Beth Newman. Bedford/ St. Martins. Second edition. 2015.  

                                  Jean Rhys,Wide Sargasso Sea. Judith L Raiskim. W.W.NORTON & Company. First edition. 1999.

Elizabeth J Donaldson , “The Corpus  of the Madwoman; Toward a Feminist Disability Studies Theory of Embodiment and Mental Illness”. Jane Eyre. Second edition. Pg 617. 2015.

Terry Eagleton, “Jane Eyre from Myths of Power; A Marxist Society of the Brontes”.   Jane Eyre. Second edition. pg 531. 2015.