Why was George Washington dismayed by the outcome of the American Revolution?
Would slavery still exist if the South had not seceded from the Union in 1861?
Might socialists govern America today if Teddy Roosevelt had not run for President and lost in 1912?
Why did Melville include all those boring chapters about whales in Moby Dick?
In everyday life, we confront problems and debate options for solving them. Then we make choices and face the consequences of our choices. Often we wonder if different choices might have been better. And we consider additional choices that might make things better.
History is the same. It is full of contingencies. Understanding history requires us to examine the plausible options that people had, the circumstances in which they made their choices, the arguments that they made about their choices, and the consequences of those choices. Most important if we are to use history to help us understand our present circumstances and the choices we face, we must explore whether a different choice might have been better. Was the American Revolution a mistake? Was racial segregation inevitable? Was the Cold War necessary? Americans have repeatedly asked these sorts of questions as they examined the consequences of their choices and considered new options.
In looking at literary works, we are faced with the choices that authors made, choices that were conditioned by the historical contexts within which they worked. Interpreting literature requires us to examine the plausible options that authors had, why they made the choices they did, and whether they made the best choices. Why did Mark Twain revert to a racist portrayal of the slave Jim at the end of Huckleberry Finn? Why does the ghost in Hamlet say that he spends his days in purgatory? Why is Popeye’s mantra “I yam what I yam?” Exploring an author’s choices can amplify the meaning of a book for our lives.
Conventional history often obscures the choices that people made. It leaves one with the feeling that what happened had to happen and that there was no choice. Conventional literary interpretations similarly often overlook the choices that authors made. One is left with the feeling that books emerge fully formed from authors’ brains like Athena from the skull of Zeus. The purpose of this blog is to discuss ways in which we can look at history and literature as a process of people making choices – the same way that people in the past looked at their lives and their work, and that we look at ours.
For a discussion of Washington’s reaction to the Revolution, see my blog post “George Washington’s Lament: Was the American Revolution based on foolish expectations?” George Washington’s Lament: Was the American Revolution based on foolish expectations?
For a discussion of why slavery would likely still exist but for southern secession, see my blog post “Would the United States still have slavery if the South had not seceded in 1861? Conclusion: Very likely.” Would the United States still have slavery if the South had not seceded in 1861? Conclusion: Very likely.
For a discussion of the long-term effect on American politics of Teddy Roosevelt’s candidacy in 1912, see Choice #11 – “Defining American Politics in the Election of 1912: Why is there no Socialism in the United States?” in my book Was the American Revolution a Mistake? Bloomington, IN: Authorhouse Press, 2013.
For a discussion of Moby Dick, see my blog post “Whalers, Whales and Morality Tales: Voyages of Discovery in Moby Dick. What’s with all those boring whale chapters?” Whalers, Whales and Morality Tales: Voyages of Discovery in Moby Dick. What’s with all those boring whale chapters?
For a discussion of the ghost in Hamlet, see my blog post “Better Dead than Red: Hamlet and the Cold War against Catholicism in Elizabethan England.” Better Dead than Red: Hamlet and the Cold War against Catholicism in Elizabethan England