All That Jazz: Louis Armstrong

Before this class, all that was familiar to me about Louis Armstrong was his distinctive, grainy singing voice (usually in a duet with Ella Fitzgerald) and his famous trumpet skills. But when we talked about jazz music in class, we watched a video clip in which another jazz artist referred to Armstrong as the most important and talented jazz musician of all time. After I heard that statement, I wanted to know more about Louis Armstrong’s life and career. As I began to research Armstrong’s biography, I was greatly impressed with the resilient optimism that permeated his life as well as his huge influence upon the entire jazz genre.

Louis Armstrong was born in 1901 to a very poor family in New Orleans. His father abandoned Louis at a young age, and his mother was unstable, leaving him to be raised by various relatives. Despite his rough childhood, Louis maintained a surprisingly optimistic view of his youth:

“Every time I close my eyes blowing that trumpet of mine, I look right in the heart of good old New Orleans...It has given me something to live for.”

Later in Louis’ career, other musicians often copied his style and technique, and I think this must have been in part because of his incredible virtuosity with the trumpet and also because of his magnanimous personality. He was always experimenting with different pulses and rhythms—a signature of improvisation that can still be heard in jazz music today. With his innovations, Armstrong raised the bar musically for other musicians in his genre, not only for jazz trumpet but also for jazz vocals.

Although there have been many critics that have denounced Armstrong for catering too much to a white audience and somehow abandoning the authenticity of jazz music, it is undeniable that Armstrong was a powerful force in shaping the entire jazz genre. The fact that there are several bands today that are dedicated to preserving and honoring Armstrong’s musical style, such as the Louis Armstrong Society, speaks of his beloved and honored status in the history of American music.

Final Paper - A Tribute to Helen Frankenthaler's Bayside

For my final project, I chose to create a visual tribute to the work of Helen Frankenthaler, focusing on her painting entitled Bayside. Inspired by her innovative technique and delicate treatment of color, I attempted to mimic her technique for applying paint to the canvas and her emphasis on the immediacy of the art. During the process of creating my final project I discovered a new appreciation for Frankenthaler’s caliber of artistic sophistication and her influence on art in the twentieth century.

As an artist during the Abstract Expressionism movement, Frankenthaler stands as a significant cultural figure for her contributions to the artistic styles and techniques of twentieth century America. Although she preferred an understated, under-worked painting style, Frankenthaler was a trained artist; she attended Dalton School, studying under the artist Rufino Tamayo, and she also studied at Bennington College. Launching her career by following Abstract Expressionism, she painted and exhibited Mountains and Sea, a work that exhibits her technique of diluting oil paints with turpentine to give a watercolor-like effect. Later in her career, Frankenthaler’s work would be described as Color-field painting, which is a style that exhibits large areas of color and deemphasizes the form and surface of the painting.

Because of her work with the Color-field movement and her distinctive technique, Frankenthaler established herself as an important cultural figure. Her significance can be detected in her work Bayside. The painting is often used to show the characteristics of the Color-field genre; Bayside is composed three largely flat planes of color on a canvas without the highly personal or gestural application of paint that is characteristic of Abstract Expressionism. Instead, the focus is on the subtle variation of the intensity and denseness in each color, particularly in the patterns of the vibrant blue of the bay. This effect of subtle coloring and shape is largely present because of the thinned-out paint’s ability to soak into the canvas. The subtle yet immediately compelling qualities of Bayside are what have allowed the painting, as well as other works of Frankenthaler, to stand as a noteworthy cultural artifact.

Although Frankenthaler’s works contain obvious artistic merit, there are critics of her works like Bayside who seem to limit her significance by labeling her works as inherently feminine; her art and technique are often seen only as female counterparts to the more violent, physical techniques of contemporary artists such as Jackson Pollock. While I do agree that Frankenthaler brings a new delicate perspective to the realm of abstract painting, I also believe that her works like Bayside possess a complexity and sophistication that cannot be simplistically labeled as solely feminine.

When I first saw an image of Bayside, I was immediately impressed with overall gracefulness of the piece as well as its bold elements, such as an occasional jagged line or a particularly dark pool of blue paint—reasons why choosing to pay tribute to this piece was a natural decision. By creating my own humble tribute to Bayside and the other works of Helen Frankenthaler, I gained a new appreciation for her virtuosity with her technique as well as her gift for creating works of art that appear initially simple but can create lasting, complex impressions.

Music Paper: A Selection of NPR's Top 100 American Songs

“Singin’ in the Rain” [To listen to the song, click here.]

My first reaction was one of excitement when I discovered this song on the list. It is possible that I have seen the movie Singin’ in the Rain more than fifty times in my life, so the song “Singin’ in the Rain” possesses a lot of personal significance. The song has meaning for me because it is a piece of unadulterated nostalgia; I have fond memories of watching the film as a child and anticipating the iconic scene where Gene Kelly sings the carefree title song while sloshing through puddles and rivulets of rain water. Because I associate the song directly with this scene in the film, I was pleased when in the audio clip one of the commentators mentioned that this particular scene in the movie was what solidified the song as an American classic, and it remains one of the most familiar and historic scenes in the history of filmmaking.

However, I was surprised to learn that the historic nature of the song “Singin’ in the Rain” didn’t start with the Gene Kelly film rendition. The song had been used in numerous films before the making of the film Singin’ in the Rain, a fact that I hadn’t known. Although the song’s date of origin is imprecise, “Singin’ in the Rain” made its movie debut in The Hollywood Revue in 1929 and reached its peak of popularity in Singin’ in the Rain. As I listened to the commentators relay the historical background of the song, I realized that several reasons exist for why the song is so important. Aside from the song’s lighthearted spirit and long-lived popularity, “Singin’ in the Rain” traces, through its many movie appearances, the history and progression of Hollywood film in the 20^th century. The song thus serves not only as a timeless pop culture classic but also as an important cultural indicator that helps measure how American cinema developed during the film industry’s early years.

“Crazy” [To listen to the song, click here.]

I have always enjoyed listening to the song “Crazy” recorded by Patsy Cline. I remember listening to it as a young teenager and being impressed with Patsy’s rich voice and the way she masterfully sang the simple lyrics and melody. But as I listened to “Crazy” with the commentary, I received new insight into the emotional power of the recording. The commentary mentioned how Patsy Cline actually disliked brokenhearted, slow songs like “Crazy,” and she didn’t initially want to record the song. The producer had to do a lot of persuading to get her to record the song; even after Patsy agreed to sing “Crazy,” there remained a great deal of artistic tension between her and the production team. With this background knowledge, I was able to understand how this archetypal recording of “Crazy” reflects the dynamic of the country music industry at the time: the song demonstrates how artistic license was widely undermined during this time period of country music.

Despite the careful and detailed, and at times tense, production behind the song, “Crazy” endures as one of the most popular and beloved American recordings. The commentary said that Patsy Cline’s rendition remains the most popular jukebox hit of all time, and I think it maintains this status because of its level of complexity and sophistication that is missing in many contemporary country music songs. As I listened to “Crazy,” I realized that the melody and chord structure of the song possess a jazzy influence that adds an extra layer of intricacy. Although the song contains a more collective complexity, I think the real power of Patsy Cline’s recording comes from the emotional intensity of her voice that almost acts as a window into her soul. When I learned that her vocals in the song were recorded in one take, the rawness of the emotions in the song and the magic in Patsy’s voice were amplified in my view. I believe that the virtuosity and unprocessed quality of Patsy Cline’s “Crazy” qualify the song to be a benchmark for other American songs.

“White Christmas” [To listen to the song, click here.]

I was thrilled to see “White Christmas” on the list. From my first memories of this song, I have identified a certain magic in its idyllic simplicity. When I would watch the film White Christmas as a child, I remember being mesmerized, right along with the soldiers in the movie, during the opening scene as Bing Crosby sang the title song.

As I listened to the commentary and discovered that the film White Christmas was a sort of regeneration of real events that Bing Crosby and others experienced while singing “White Christmas” to overseas American troops. This background information confirmed to me the universal appeal that “White Christmas” holds for people from all kinds of backgrounds, whether their Christmases past were white or not.

The concreteness of the song’s significance was amplified when I discovered the history of songwriter, Irving Berlin. For Berlin, who was Jewish, Christmas must have been much like other American holidays that are of a more secular nature. Instead of being founded upon specific religious sentiments, “White Christmas” is based on bedrock American values and contains evocative, nostalgic images that appeal to a wide variety of people; it is a song that transcends social classes and religions.

Upon closer listening, I also realized that the song is more complicated than it at first appears. In spirit, “White Christmas” is a blues song; the tune is rather melancholy and full of longing, and yet most people that listen to it as a way to amplify their Christmas cheer. I think the song conveys some of the ambivalent feelings that many people experience during the Holiday season, which is another aspect of the song’s power that allows so many to connect with it. The ambivalence and complexity of the song’s meaning seems reflexive of America’s own ambivalent and multi-layered nature. It is little wonder to me that “White Christmas” is the most recorded popular song of all time and remains one of the most recognized and adored Christmas songs.

Romeo and Juliet and Gilded Age American Society

BYU’s production of Shakespeare’s tragedy Romeo and Juliet was an interesting exploration into the larger social implications of the play. By setting the production in Gilded Age America, the production staff emphasized how the characters Romeo and Juliet are not so much the romantic lovers that they are often portrayed to be, but are rather naïve, inexperienced victims of their families’ insatiable greed and power-striving.

There were many elements of the production that I thought contributed to the emphasis on the corruption and avarice of the Capulets and the Montagues. The most obvious elements were the costuming and set design, which were both consistent with late nineteenth century America. The allusions to the Gilded Age were also specific to actual people of that time; the Capulet family represented the Astor family dynasty, the Montague family channeled the Vanderbilts, and the third power family in the play, the house of Escalus, represented J.P. Morgan’s involvement with stabilizing various industries during the Gilded Age. (For more historical background on the Astors, Vanderbilts, and Morgans, click here, here, and here.) The obvious connections to real figures of the Gilded Age were further reinforced by the insertion of lines from Ward McAllister’s book Society as I Have Found It. The book was published in 1892 as an examination and explanation of many of practices and standards of the elite in American society. All of the historical figures alluded to in the play were strong forces in the economic and social climates of the day. By suggesting that the Montagues and the Capulets were similar to Gilded Age tycoons and dynasties, the production staff created a link between the conflict in the play with the families' love of money and power. Because of these many allusions to society in Gilded Age America, the production reinforces how the theme of how lust and greed are inextricably linked.

Another element in the production that I noticed was the emphasis on dancing. The careful choreography of the play helped establish how Romeo and Juliet were largely pawns in the greedy schemes of their parents and families. Throughout the play, there are numerous scenes were dancing plays a large part in the action, such as when Romeo and Juliet first meet at a ball. The production staff took the dancing motif even further; in almost every scene change, the actors on stage danced and moved with careful precision as they moved props around. At times, the various characters from both families would lead or even push Romeo and Juliet around the stage. This demonstrated how both Juliet and Romeo were used and exploited by their families to improve their social standings, or business endeavors. The large amount of dancing in the play also emphasized how in Gilded Age America, aesthetic, outward activities like dancing gracefully or dressing elaborately were in reality a thin veneer masking inner ugliness and corruption.

Before seeing BYU’s production, Romeo and Juliet was actually one of my least favorite Shakepearean plays. Despite the beautiful lyricism of the lovers’ words, I always felt that for a play that is often described as one of the most romantic stories of all time, it was in fact one of the least romantic stories of all time. What is romantic or poignant about two teenagers meeting, getting married mere days later, and killing themselves when they believe the other to be dead? I had never connected with the story or the characters, which prevented me from appreciating any of the play’s redeeming qualities.

However, after seeing how BYU’s production emphasized the parts that greed and power-lust play in the story, I now view the Romeo and Juliet with an entirely new perspective. The environment that Romeo and Juliet were raised in was one where love of money and social standing was paramount. The Capulets and the Montagues are left with the situation of dealing with the deaths of their children, a tragedy that is largely a result of their poisoned priorities. The warning against the consequences of greed and lust is a much more powerful and tragic message to me, and in my view it is a message that is more consistent with the multi-faceted themes found in Shakespeare’s other plays. Because of the unique staging of the BYU production of Romeo and Juliet, I can now more greatly appreciate the genius of Shakespeare’s original play, and I more fully understand how Gilded Age America is a manifestation of social ills that have plagued society for centuries.

Maynard Dixon’s No Place to Go: Disillusionment and Distress in the Pursuit of the American Dream

Maynard Dixon painted American scenes and landscapes at a time of great national uncertainty and upheaval. In his painting No Place to Go, Dixon utilizes compositional elements such as the subject matter, positioning of lines, and color to convey tones of disenchantment and quiet despair. By creating these tones through the amalgamation of various artistic movements, Dixon effectively portrays America’s disillusionment with the American Dream during the Great Depression, thus challenging the reality of the promise of happiness and prosperity that for so long defined an American ideal.

A closer look at Dixon’s life and career can aid in a greater comprehension of the disillusioned sentiment expressed in No Place to Go. Examining the significant events in his life as well as the art movements to which he adhered is particularly helpful in interpreting the social ideals challenged in the painting.

Dixon was born in Fresno, California to a family of aristocratic Virginians, and in his youth he was encouraged to hone his natural proficiency for writing and drawing (Wikipedia, “Maynard Dixon”). [Click here for a more detailed account of Dixon's life and works.] His mentor, Charles Lummis, encouraged Dixon to leave California to paint “the real West” (Sublette). As Dixon crisscrossed the Western United States, his paintings reflected many elements of the Regionalist movement. Several components of Regionalism can be detected in No Place to Go, most notably in the way that Dixon depicts the figure in a realistic manner with a subtle celebration of the man’s middle-American appearance. No Place to Go also exhibits elements representative of other art movements. Hints of Modernism are seen in the simplification of the composition of the landscape; rather than including close details of the surrounding hills and ocean, Dixon simply gives the suggestion of the basic forms of the land. Done in 1935, the painting is perhaps among Dixon’s most well known involvements in the Social Realism movement, as can be seen by the subdued colors and the overall theme of disappointment and loneliness that the work conveys. The personal forlornness of the painting is magnified with the view that Dixon and his social photographer wife Dorothea Lange, who encouraged him to chronicle the ills of the Great Depression, separated in the same year (Wikipedia). With a greater understanding of the art movements and events that influenced Dixon’s aesthetic choices, the task of interpreting the significance of his artwork becomes simpler.

Through his use of the subject matter and setting of the painting, Dixon effectively communicates to the viewer the despairing situation not only of the figure in the painting but also of the nation as a whole during the Great Depression. The man in the painting is the dominant focus; his downcast face and defeated stance immediately tell of his difficult situation. The knapsack on his back suggests that he has made a long journey, and the slight shabbiness and worn-out quality of his appearance imply that the journey has been made in pursuit of better circumstances. Although the man is painted realistically, his face is generic and rather impersonal, which allows viewers to project their own images, or the identity of society as a whole, into the situation. The man is leaning against a forlorn fence set among barren hills that border a flat, lifeless ocean in the background. The coastal setting of the painting indicates that the man, beaten down and hopeless, has reached the end of the land—the West Coast of America. As the man has physically reached the limits of America, it appears that he has also reached the limits of the American Dream and is now without hope or options that might lead to prosperity. This suggestion of the end of the American Dream and the Myth of the West directly challenges the notion of the limitless possibilities that make up the fabric of the American experience.

The compositional lines of No Place to Go also contribute to the painting’s message of the frustrated ideals of the time period. In the painting, the lines, particularly those that form the landscape, serve as a way to focus the attention of the viewer upon certain key elements of the painting that in turn convey the tones and meaning of the work. After the viewer focuses on the downcast figure, his or her eye is attracted to the sloping line of the fence, which recedes down the hill and out of view. This dwindling line suggests that the man no longer has any specific destination to work toward and is trapped in a kind of prison of no options—the trail that he has been following in his pursuit of happiness has gone cold. After the eye follows the sloping line of the fence to its dead end, the rolling silhouette of the hill beyond attracts attention, connoting yet another barrier impeding the man’s way. Finally, the flat, rigid demarcation of the shimmering sea and monotonous sky draws the eye to the upper-right corner of the painting and reminds the viewer that the Myth of the West, which for centuries promised prosperity to those who ventured into the western expanse of the America, ends with the limits of the continent against the endless expanse of the ocean. This sentiment of bitter limitations exposes the frustrations and disappointments experienced by many Americans with hopes of new horizons during the Great Depression.

The use of color and light in the painting also contribute to the tones of disappointed hopes and a loss of faith in the American Dream. Dixon utilizes exaggerated shadows and colors that are slightly stylized in a manner that subtly but effectively perpetuates the feeling of disenchantment. Unlike many of his other landscapes, No Place to Go contains mostly subdued hues, a stylistic choice that lends to the despairing mood of the piece. The only color that jumps out in the painting is the golden field in the foreground. This richly colored piece of land is reminiscent of the idyllic American landscape and is set in contrast to the somber and defeated tones present in the rest of the painting. As the elongated, eye-catching shadows of the painting set on the scene, they also represent the end of the golden view of the ideal of the American Dream.

Throughout Maynard Dixon’s painting No Place to Go, the artist utilizes various compositional choices, especially the subject matter, setting, lines, and color, to demonstrate the feelings of disenchantment and melancholy that questioned the validity of the American Dream during the Great Depression and exposed the seriousness and disappointment which defined that era. No Place to Go serves as a compelling commentary on the personal despair and hopelessness that came about partly because of the overextension of the ideal of American Dream. Because of the universal themes and emotions that the work addresses, the painting becomes a poignant glimpse into the personal turmoil during a hopeless situation as well as a powerful critique of the reality of the American Dream during the Great Depression. As I pondered over some of the aesthetic and cultural implications of the painting, I was able to more greatly appreciate the work and style of Maynard Dixon, and I understood more fully how the disillusionment of the Great Depression led many Americans to lose hope in the promise of prosperity and happiness. When considering that the work was painted during a time of both national and personal turmoil, No Place to Go serves as a powerful challenge of the values that shape American society as well as an intimate glimpse into the artist’s own private despondency.

Works Cited

Maynard Dixon. Wikipedia. 6 Oct. 2010. Wikipedia Foundation. 18 Oct. 2010. .

Sublette, J. Mark. "Maynard Dixon Biography." 19 Oct 2010. .

The Plea for Tolerance

For our first writing assignment, I chose to write a satirical piece based on "The War Prayer" by Mark Twain. To read the original, go here. (And if that's not enough for you, go here to see an actor recite the end of the satire.) Here is mine, entitled "The Plea for Tolerance":

It was a time of great and exalting progress. The country was on the defense, the war against intolerance was on, in every breast burned the righteous fire of individual rights and democracy. Every mouth uttered eloquent words championing the need for tolerance in our communities, in our schools, and in our homes. “No more bigotry, racism, or narrow-mindedness!” was the rally cry. Daily the freedom volunteers spread their message of acceptance through the airwaves, news wires, and political campaigns, the proud victims of intolerance cheering them with voices choked with joyous emotion as their call for tolerance was heeded.

Nightly the television viewers listened to brilliant oratory directed against the parochial hogwash of the small-minded. Such eloquence stirred the deepest deeps of the viewers’ hearts, and they interrupted at intervals with applause and cheering, the tears running down their cheeks as they cried, “At last! The rights of individuals are finally being upheld! We are closer than ever to purging the poison of intolerance that infects our nation.” Many people throughout the country were thrilled at the thought that once the evil influence of intolerance was rooted out of society, peaceful coexistence could finally thrive, just as the Constitution and the Bill of Rights advocated.

The holiday season came—flocks of tolerance promoters would set out en masse with new focus. At the time that many Christians began to turn more attention toward the core beliefs of their religion, those that campaigned for tolerance valiantly stifled any improper, ostentatious displays of religious opinions that might tread on or offend the beliefs of others. After all, for what was America founded, if not for fairness? Rather than promoting one narrow religious perspective, the people who made up the religious majority in America were encouraged to embrace the diversity of spiritual thought that existed throughout the nation.

The religious sects and other institutions that passed rigid judgment on the personal preferences of others, preferences such as free love, pro-choice, and homosexuality, were quickly made aware of their ignorant, narrow-minded attitudes. The heroic advocates of progressiveness encouraged these bigoted groups to open their minds to the fact that the rights of individuals allowed them to act however their moral compass guided them, unhindered by the crippling “principled” decrees of the ignorant. Diversity of action must be permitted to flourish; if not, the country was in danger of growing ever more rigid in its attitude toward an individual’s alternative lifestyle. Yes, diversity was what the nation needed.

Then came the real campaign. The meeting hall was filled; a multitude of freedom advocates were present, each face alight with dreams of the peaceful future—visions of the complete understanding, the total unity of thought, the overall fairness and opportunity of expression. With one burst of energy the entire hall rose, with glowing eyes and beating hearts as a group of broadminded public figures pledged their efforts in convincing the hordes of prejudiced Americans to adopt a more healthy perspective. One among the crowd began, in passionate and pleading language, to call for Congress, that revered body of power, to create an statute that would further allow them to aid and shield the victims of intolerance. They begged for a law that would enable them to promote liberality of thought and to crush the binding grip of intolerance upon the heart of the prejudiced.

A feeble stranger entered the meeting and slowly moved toward the platform, his sad eyes fixed upon the main speaker. As he ascended the stairs and turned to face the crowd, the people gradually stifled their pleas and turned their attention to the newcomer. For some moments he surveyed the silent but restless audience with a solemn, burning gaze; then in a quiet but unwavering voice began:

“I come from that revered body of power to which you plead!” The words resounded throughout the meeting hall, sending a thrill throughout the hearts of many in the crowd. Their pleas had been answered! “Congress has listened to your countless pleas for tolerance and open-mindedness that you so fervently hope to be spread throughout our nation. It is willing to grant help with your mission after I, the messenger, have explained to you its full import. Like many requests, it is asking for more than the requesters are aware of.

“Have any of you paused to think of what you have asked? Would your mission, if executed in the desired way, have only one outcome? No, it would have two—one being the desire you have promulgated to the world: advocating tolerance throughout America would lead to less outspokenness. But if you truly desire to promote tolerance, beware how you go about attempting to spread it.

“I am commissioned to explain to you the nature of your tolerance campaign. It is a double-edged sword. As you identify people as intolerant, it is possible that you are the ones guilty of intolerance. When you condemn one person of narrow-mindedness or unjust tyranny in their judgments of moral actions, it is likely you that is imposing your beliefs on another. When you call for greater diversity by squalling at those who express an opinion that is politically incorrect or undiplomatic, you are in reality killing the diversity that makes this nation great. Although you may claim to believe in the freedom of expression, when one man expresses an opinion different than your own, he is soundly censored and condemned. In one sense, tolerance becomes intolerance.

“It is right for you to be aware, then, that when you go throughout the country crying for an end to bigotry and narrow-mindedness, you may be saying, “Stop trying to resist my point of view. It is quite obviously superior to your own. How dare you disagree with me?’. That is not tolerance. That is intellectual cowardice, a refusal to confront a disagreement with tact and consideration. This nation was not built upon the idea of bullying and coercing people to fall in line with one specific point of view. America was created with the intent of being a safe haven for those who wish to express their beliefs freely, whether they are deemed politically incorrect, close-minded, or prejudiced by others.

“Remember, true tolerance is not a suppression of will or thought in order to fall in line with the views of everyone else. With real tolerance, two people with differing convictions are able to respect each other despite their disparity in opinion. It is not necessary that we tolerate ideas or behavior; everyone is entitled to hold strong views regarding right or wrong, and those that hinder the safety of others should be held accountable. But we should strive to be tolerant of people, to treat every person we encounter with the respect and civility they deserve, especially when their views differ from our own. People do not respond well when they are labeled as bigoted, or racist, or narrow-minded, or ignorant. A change for the better is more likely to occur if it is brought about through calm and sound reasoning. It is only then that genuine diversity will thrive. If you truly want tolerance to take root in this nation, start by practicing it yourselves.”

Afterwards, it was concluded that the man must have been unhinged, because what kind of tolerant congressman would spout off such narrow-minded nonsense?

The Portrait of a Gentleman

Before Humanities 262, I had never read anything by this guy.

Meet James. Henry James. Although I had heard of a few of his works like The Portrait of a Lady and The Turn of the Screw, I really knew nothing about James or his writing style. As part of our class, we read one of his novellas, Daisy Miller. I loved this short story, and it sparked my interest in the life of Henry James and his literary perspective.

While I was reading about the life of Henry James, I was immediately struck by the similarities between the character Winterbourne from Daisy Miller and the author himself. Like Winterbourne, James spent his youth traveling and studying back and forth between America and Europe. Both Winterbourne and James were expatriates. And like his character, Henry James seems to have possessed an ambivalent view of American society and custom. In my own view, these striking similarities between character and author make Daisy Miller seem like a psychological experiment, adding another layer of interest to the story. (If you feel so inclined to read a great deal more about the life of Henry James, click here.)

I think understanding a little bit about Henry James makes it easier to understand the themes of his novels. Many of his stories deal with Americans who are drowning in the customs and culture of the Old World. Although his works tend to provide a realistic, unflinching look at the flaws of both the European and American cultures, there is a thread running throughout his writing that sets up America as less cultured and refined.

Having spent a few months in Europe myself and observed the two cultures side by side, I can, to some extent, identify with James’ view of Americans. It may be true that we Yankees are a little more casual and a little less polished. However, in my view, part of the American Dream is the ability to reinvent yourself, to progress. And no matter how European Henry James might have tried to become, he was, ironically, fulfilling part of the American Dream in the process. So even though Henry James said,

“However British you may be, I am more British still,”

he will always be an American. Sorry, Henry. But, American or European, he knew the value of living life to the fullest:

"Live all you can; it's a mistake not to. It doesn't so much matter what you do in particular so long as you have your life. If you haven't had that what have you had?" --from the Preface of The Ambassadors