This essay analyzes implied claims in literature on the works of Kenan Randall’s The Foundations of the Earth, Hawthorne Nathaniel’s The Birth-mark, and Alexie Sherman’s Superman and Me. Kenan in his story tells of Mrs. Maggie William, a widow who hosted Tims Creek and a white-man, Gabriel. Kenan narrates that Mrs. Maggie experienced deaths in her life starting with that of the grandparents, her husband’s and the grandson’s (Edward). The narration based on Christianity practitioner discussions with Reverend Barden leading the Tims Creek. Gabriel was an invited guest from Boston, who lived with Edward before his death six months ago.
Hawthrone, narrates of a story that a scientist researcher by the name Aylmer quitted research to date a young beautiful woman, Georgiana. However, Georgiana had a birth-mark on the cheek that irritated Aylmer after their marriage. Aylmer proceeded to carry operation on the birth-mark despite the resist from the wife, Georgiana.
On the other hand, Alexie tells of his own story, where he started learning to read until he became a writer. Despite the poverty that befell his family, his father had love for reading. Alexie followed the likes of the father and taught himself to read at a young age. He joined school to surprise fellow Indians and put off the mentality among the non-Indians that he could read. When he became a writer, he taught fellow Indians to read.
Kenan’s story has an implied claim about religion. The evidence about the claim rise in the story as it flows from the beginning to the end. ‘Sunday is His day.’ (Kenan, 150). This was a word form the Tims creek telling the gathering that Sunday must be kept holy. Maggie and the Tims Creek kept Sunday, a holy Sabbath day for resting. Reverend Barden wondered why Morton was working on the farm on Sunday, instead of keeping the Christian values for resting. ‘Don’t they realize it is Sunday?’ (par. 3). Maggie fulfilled this claim by ensuring church attendance with her invited guest, Gabriel.
The rhetorical question that remains about the claim in Kenan’s narration is whether Maggie is a Christian values practitioner or not. She kept to church attendance and resting on Sunday, but she had no objection in Morton working on Sunday, a Sabbath day. It is out of this that the Tims Creek said she should start to learn. She also watched soaps on TV just like Emma, her house-help, and other women. The claim is true as the gathering at Maggie’s home did not work on Sunday, but attended church, keeping Sunday, a holy day. The fact that Morton accepted that he was on the wrong by working on Sunday, but his many need compelled him, justified the claim.
Another implied claim in Kenan’s story is about homosexuality. Maggie’s invited guest, Gabriel, is a homosexual. Clarissa told her grandmother, Maggie, that Edward lived with a fellow man a man and wife for all the years Edward vanished in Boston. (Kenan, 152). Edward did not practice Christianity values. “…You’re not from a churchgoing family, are you?” “Well, no, …” Gabriel answered. (Kenan, 149, par. 3). The rhetoric appeal about the claim is that Maggie, convinced of the deviancy of Gabriel, she still invited him long after the burial of Edward, her grandson. I refute the claim as no other proof of the claim, apart from the statement of Clarissa.
In Alexie’s narration, there is an implied claim of intelligence. “A smart Indian is a dangerous person, widely feared and ridiculed by Indians and non-Indians alike.” (Alexie, 210). The whole group in school expected that no Indian child would read. Alexie taught himself how to read, and would read books, papers, wall writings, writings on clothes, among others. He read the word ‘paragraph’ and interpreted himself as ‘a fence that held words.’ “I used our reservations as an example of a paragraph within the United states.” (Alexie, par. 3). The appeal in this claim is Alexie’s lack of interest in consulting on some vocabularies and pronunciation of new words from the father or any other family member. We expect that since he was learning from the father’s reading habits, he would have consulted him on some new words. The claim is true. The non-Indian teachers had made up minds over the ‘dormancy’ of Indian children, therefore, did not expect Alexie to be able to read.
In Hawthorne’ s, The Birth-Mark, he brings out the implied claim of dreams. Aylmer, after marrying Georgiana, he insisted that Georgiana accepts removal of the birth-mark on her cheek. After some argument over the means of the birth-mark removal, Aylmer slept and had a dream. He dreamt of forcibly, in assistance of his house-help, tried to remove Georgiana’s birth-mark. When he wakes up, Georgiana insisted on knowing the dream that her husband, Aylmer had. Aylmer decides to narrate the dream after realizing it would come true as he intended to do it. “Truth often finds its way to the mind close muffled in roes of sleep, and then speaks with uncompromising directives of matters in regard to which we practice an unconscious self-deception during our waking moments.” (Hawthorne, 529).
The evidence of the dream claim comes amid the step that Aylmer took after the dream to operate the birth-mark on Georgiana’s cheek. The rhetorical appeal in the claim of true dreams is that the dreams always revolve around life happenings. Therefore, proof of the dreams that lead to new happenings in life is not evident. Aylmer and Maggie dreamt of their real life happening at that time of the happenings. This can not be a proof for a dream showing future happenings out of the current ones. In my opinion, the claim is true. Dreams in life revolve around daily life situations and that so happen.
|Elie Wiesel’s Stories||White Teeth by Zadie Smith|