PDA

View Full Version : Washington Irving, Nathaniel Hawthorne, and Halloween



AuntShecky
10-30-2008, 02:50 PM
Irving, Hawthorne, and Halloween

In my country October 31 is a strange celebration. It’s not a “legal” holiday in the sense that the government and banks shut down and the kids get another day off from school (as if they needed another one!) Yet it is one of the most widely celebrated holidays of the year, in terms of retail sales for decorations, candy, and costumes, including -- if you can believe it -- adult sizes.

Apart from autumn’s natural beauty-- and perhaps chocolate, there’s little to like about Halloween. Some of the ways Americans mark the day make it seem like a celebration of bad taste. This year let me offer of an alternative to schlocky horror movies infested with vampires, serial killers, and slashers. I’m talking about two American short stories that are ripe for Halloween reading: “The Legend of Sleepy Hollow” and “Young Goodman Brown.”

Although Washington Irving was highly popular during his career, critics and more casual readers don’t immediately think of his name when compiling a list of great American writers of the early nineteenth century. But two of Irving’s characters are truly “iconic” (that term that gets bandied about too loosely these days): Rip Van Winkle and Ichabod Crane. Both of those stories are deeply steeped in the history, Dutch heritage, and scenic geography of New York’s Hudson River Valley, but the lore and legends are especially prominent through “The Legend of Sleepy Hollow,” first published in New York in 1819-1820.

Just as writers of fantasy try to maximize the “willful suspension of disbelief” by including identifiably realistic elements in their work, Irving roots this story in an actual place,Tarrytown, New York, which was given that name he tells us “by the good housewives of the adjacent country, from the inveterate propensity of their husbands to linger about the village tavern on market days.” (Hmm, I wonder if this was the inspiration for the “Sidetrack Tap” in Garrison Keillor’s Lake Woebegone.) Ichabod Crane, the village pedagogue, goes through a harrowing experience that can be frightening for some younger
readers, but mostly Ichabod is a figure of fun. He’s meant to be laughed at. Despite
his scarecrow-like appearance, he has an inflated sense of self-esteem, mainly in his
adamant belief that he has a shot with the town’s hottie, Katrina, upon whom another dashing bachelor, Brom Bones, has his eye. Ichabod’s worst flaw, however, is his
obsession with the scary local legends, especially the one about the “Headless Horseman of Sleepy Hollow.” With each reading of this traditional story, one can see subtle suggestions of meaning. The author has a keen eye for detail, evocative passages that approach real beauty, and most of all, a satirical view of the vagaries of human nature. Washington Irving was one of the very first American writers to use humor effectively. That the story is still funny to us in the 21st century is a tribute to Washington Irving’s unsung talent.

Nathaniel Hawthorne’s 1854 story, by contrast, is decidedly not funny but no less entertaining, as the ramifications of the theme are, to put it mildly, disturbing. “Young Goodman Brown”definitely “scares” the reader, but rather than startling us the way a monster might pop into a frame in a move, it shocks us into questioning the way we look at the world andour fellow human beings. The short story opens with the title character bidding his wife goodbye before leaving on an unspecified errand. The wife, significantly named “Faith,” also is described as wearing a bonnet with pink ribbons, the innocence of that color just as symbolic as the scarlet letter in that other famous Hawthorne work. For most of the story Goodman Brown walks along a path through the woods, the final destination of which is far more sinister than the shadowy shapes in Sleepy Hollow. Yet it’s not what Goodman Brown finds at the end of the path that is frightening, it’s who he finds there. At the end of the story, the title character is left doubting what it means to be “good,” doubting the motives and the character of his neighbors, doubting his own sanity. Young Goodman Brown is forced into a position of both judging and being judged. No less heartbreaking is the ultimately sad discovery of hypocrisy. Things are not what they seem;
nothing is what it is supposed to be. Everything that Goodman Brown has up until then held dear has been blown away, like the smoke rising above the large fire in the center of the community’s evil gathering in the woods.

Just as Ichabod Crane is a victim of his own gullibility, young Goodman Brown may be a victim of his own guilt. Both stories operate on the Imagination onthree levels: that of the respective authors, the characters, and the readers.

So, put a little imagination into your Trick or Treat bag – and have a happy Halloween!

waryan
11-04-2008, 06:42 AM
Two fantastic authors to read for halloween; I actually think of them and the worlds they created in their works when I think of the holiday. Great post, and I hope you had a fine all saints day.

Whifflingpin
11-04-2008, 03:28 PM
Yes, thanks AuntShecky.
I read "Young Goodman Brown" and it was as good as you said it would be. Even better, it jolted me into reading "The Scarlet Letter," that I'd somehow missed reading until now.
So thanks for your recommendations.

hellsapoppin
11-17-2008, 08:58 PM
Both are excellent authors and their writings are among the very best ever written in the USA. But the reason why Irving is not thought of so well nowadays is because he was a hard core racist.

While we are justified in condemning his warped views, we should do our best to understand that our modern sensibilities were virtually unheard of in that era. Therefore, the best thing for the modern reader to do is to try to understand his milieu and how it impacted on or created his ideas.

AuntShecky
11-18-2008, 02:58 PM
Of course, Hellsapoppin, you are correct about Washington Irving's alleged racism, yet as you say, one tries to understand an author within the context of his time. For one thing, we know that Irving was a neighbor and supporter of President Martin van Buren, who was wishy-washy on the subject of abolitionism.

On the other hand, Irving wrote a long work about his travels in Spain, and the narration seems to show admiration for the Moors and their architecture and other
contributions to that country.

Even so, if you ever visited my neck o' the woods you will find several schools and other public sites unapologetically named after both men. An excellent fairly-recent article about naming NYC streets after historical figures renounces Irving:

http://www.ourtimepress.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=24&Itemid=1

As evidence, the essayist extracts thoroughly condemning
statements about African-Americans in a letter to his nephew, Pierre, who elsewhere states that his uncle's attitude toward race is "inconsistent" (not that it alleviates the problem, of course.) The essay doesn't completely let
more-enlightened historical figures of the time off the hook,
i.e. a church named after the activist Peter Claver was still segregated. Another point in that essay is the use of the "N" word, which was an insult and an epithet even in those days. We must keep in mind, however, that Mark Twain used that identical word in Huck Finn, though any reasonable person reading that novel would know that Twain was anti-slavery.

I spent a few minutes on the net and wasn't able to find much evidence about Irving's attitude toward Native Americans, but apparently it was biased against them, as well, although the theme of Rip Van Winkle juxtaposes the themes of "natural" man at home in the wilderness against the over-civilized man. Some have found Rip Van Winkle to be anti-feminist, but perhaps the disparaging picture of Mrs. Van Winkle shouldn't be used as evidence against the whole gender. A link on the Web shows a professor's syllabus about Washington Irving in which he
cautions his students not to forget Irving's sense of humor.
Of course, it's one thing to make fun of Ichabod's vanity and other faults; it's another to denigrate a whole different race of human beings.

We've come back to the question that occurs again and again on this forum and other sites which explore cultural topics: can we separate the man from the work of art?
Is it appropriate for the Israeli Philharmonic to perform works by Wagner? (It has.) How can we admire the poetry of Ezra Pound, a notorious anti-Semite? Again, your suggestion that we should consider the works in the context of the milieu in which they were written is the only way to go.

There was slavery in the Bible, but that doesn't stop people from reading it in the 21st century.

{Note added 12/7/08:

Recently I read that one of the newly-issued U.S. gold dollar coins will bear the image of Martin van Buren, the sixth President of the United States
(1827-1841). The economic collapse which van Buren faced are remarkably similar to those which the country is facing right now.

I'm still not completely convinced that either Mr. Irving or President van Buren were out-and-out "racists," at least in our contemporary connotation of the word. So I went back to read a little bit more about the little giant from Kinderhook.

The abolitionists did give him their support when he was a leader of the Democratic Party; "any port in the storm," must have been the philosophy. When van Buren later moved to the "Free Soil Party," he opposed the extension of slavery into the new states, but during his Presidency he did little or nothing to eliminate slavery. If interested, here's a succinct overview of the man
http://www.answers.com/topic/martin-van-buren