Imagine Augusta under military occupation, Atlanta being shelled and burned, and Savannah being captured as a Christmas. One might ask what could cause destruction like that. What is powerful enough to make the country turn upon itself? What is the force that could turn Georgia into a war zone and Augusta into ash? The answer, simply put, is nothing more than a book. In 1862, as the United States of America was experiencing the catalyst of social change that would later become known as the Civil War, the author of the novel Uncle Tom’s Cabin, Harriet Beecher Stowe was given the opportunity to meet with President Abraham Lincoln. It’s reported that when Stowe and Lincoln saw each other in person, Lincoln was quick to ask Stowe, “So you 're the
…show more content…
Jacobs wrote a similar story for the case of abolitionism through which she told her own experience as a slave in North Carolina. Jacobs recounted her experience as a girl, a mother, and as a victim of the system of chattel slavery. She also mentioned throughout the book the damage that slavery also does for the white families who participate in the system in order to influence white people, specifically white women to gather behind her cause (Jacobs). Throughout the writing, Jacobs makes many calls to action to her white counterparts, even going as far to have section from the book which exclaim that white women have also been disadvantaged by slavery and that all women, enslaved or free, wanted similar things in life, especially when it came to their children being able to function freely in society. This novel is also sometimes credited with the increased sentiments that lead up to the civil war. It is what finally was able to portray enslaved blacks as humans and slavery as an institution that not only took away the right of those enslaved but also threatened the freedom of white Americans. Saying things such as, “Mrs. Bruce, and every member of her family, were exceedingly kind to me. I was thankful for the blessings of my lot, yet I could not always wear a cheerful countenance” allows for her to show white abolitionists that their actions are …show more content…
For example, in a scholarly paper titled “Literature as a History of Social Change”, K. N. Panikkar argues that literature is actually just a recording medium for social change. They argue that change is present in the masses before it is present in forms of literature. The instance of given of this are Winston Churchill’s History of the Second World War and Thomas Babington Macauly’s History of the French Revolution (Pannikar 3). The paper is arguing that since these examples of literature occurred after the instances that they cover, that they are simply a product of history, but what the paper fails to examine is the effect that these books would have on the social situation after their publication. The French Revolution itself inspired many European revolutions, so who is to say that books upon it may not inspire revolutionary thought. The same can be argued about the covering of the Second World War and all other major incidences within history. So while Pannikar makes the case that literature is a byproduct of social change, they fail to realize that literature has the ability to exist as both a recapturing of history, but also an influence of the
Jacobs wrote a similar story for the case of abolitionism through which she told her own experience as a slave in North Carolina. Jacobs recounted her experience as a girl, a mother, and as a victim of the system of chattel slavery. She also mentioned throughout the book the damage that slavery also does for the white families who participate in the system in order to influence white people, specifically white women to gather behind her cause (Jacobs). Throughout the writing, Jacobs makes many calls to action to her white counterparts, even going as far to have section from the book which exclaim that white women have also been disadvantaged by slavery and that all women, enslaved or free, wanted similar things in life, especially when it came to their children being able to function freely in society. This novel is also sometimes credited with the increased sentiments that lead up to the civil war. It is what finally was able to portray enslaved blacks as humans and slavery as an institution that not only took away the right of those enslaved but also threatened the freedom of white Americans. Saying things such as, “Mrs. Bruce, and every member of her family, were exceedingly kind to me. I was thankful for the blessings of my lot, yet I could not always wear a cheerful countenance” allows for her to show white abolitionists that their actions are …show more content…
For example, in a scholarly paper titled “Literature as a History of Social Change”, K. N. Panikkar argues that literature is actually just a recording medium for social change. They argue that change is present in the masses before it is present in forms of literature. The instance of given of this are Winston Churchill’s History of the Second World War and Thomas Babington Macauly’s History of the French Revolution (Pannikar 3). The paper is arguing that since these examples of literature occurred after the instances that they cover, that they are simply a product of history, but what the paper fails to examine is the effect that these books would have on the social situation after their publication. The French Revolution itself inspired many European revolutions, so who is to say that books upon it may not inspire revolutionary thought. The same can be argued about the covering of the Second World War and all other major incidences within history. So while Pannikar makes the case that literature is a byproduct of social change, they fail to realize that literature has the ability to exist as both a recapturing of history, but also an influence of the