Asma, Hawthorne, rowlandson

Anne Hutchinson was a spiritual leader in Puritan Massachusetts in a time when women were expected to followers. Hutchinson not only provided spiritual guidance for women but for men as well. This bothered Governor John Winthrop so he explained away Anne's independent spirit by claiming "mental illness brought on by excessive study". (Slavicek 30) This is the same type of ideology that led to the punishment of Hester in the Scarlet Letter. Hester was wild with desires and unable to control her feminine self. So the question asked in class was "Are we really powerless against our own internal desires?" Stephen Asma discusses this monster within us and if we have the power to control our desires. He describes a monstrous being that has many-heads, claws, lion features, as well as man features. This monster is the "human psyche" (52). Asma states that according to Socrates man has three aspects of the soul..."reason, emotion, and appetite"(52). Asma relates that when the human psyche is unbalanced, undernourished, or diseased, then one of these aspects takes over. Following this ideology we would assume that Hester was not able to control her appetite and perhaps Anne was unable to control her reason. Not matter what the cause...in Puritan America, women were to remain in their "God-Given" role and not step out or be scrutinized publicly. Now I understand that I am using 21st century morals to study the 16th century. Slavicek explains that Puritan society sees any crime as a crime of the community. In this respect the entire community must participate in the punishment (19). This is the reason for Hester's "A". Now when I consider what this must have been like for her I try to think of what would be an equal punishment now. The movie Easy A tried to portray this. The young lady wore her A with pride...but she never really committed the crime. What about the women who are still scrutinized in 2011? What does their scarlet letter look like? Is it the woman who has children out of wedlock? Is it the woman who has biracial children? Is it the woman who is trying to climb the corporate ladder? I am a single mother with two children who are black. I have been scrutinized for all of the above...I was purposely looked over for a promotion in position that I had been in for 9 years at the City of Columbus. I worked for Family Video momentarily and was told by the District Manager that the people who make it in management in that company were men who were married...of course my reply..."find me a wife". And to top it off... In the education program here at Otterbein I was informed my life was just too big to be a teacher...what exactly does that mean? Is it because I also do not follow social norms...I have a spirited nature...I refuse to give in or up on my beliefs...I too will wear my "A" with pride, just as Hester did. Hester is described to put her baby on her arm and walk through the crowd with a "haughty smile, and glance that would not be abashed"(Hawthorne 1361). With pride Hester wore her punishment for a crime that was out of love and was punishable by people outside of her control. She took back her control, her destiny, by not giving them the shame they were looking for. We discuss virtue and I believe this is virtue. On the other hand of this Puritan belief is Mary Rowlandson. Rowlandson was kidnapped by Native Americans during King Phillip's War. She was seen a woman who kept the highest level of regard for her faith, her community, and her sex. She tells in her autobiographical tale of capture of how she kept her bible in hand, " I had my Bible with me, I pulled it out , and asked her whether she would read." (315). Rowlandson did break barriers by writing a narrative of her captivity and it was well received because she embodies the ideal Puritan woman. In doing this, Rowlandson also embodies and represents the superiority of the settlers of America. Slavicek, Louise Chipley. Life Among the Puritans. San Diego: Lucent Books, 2001.

Mather and Asma- Witchcraft and biblical monsters

I have always found this debate over God to be very interesting. Why would God want to hurt us if he loves us so much? We witness in the Book of Job that God bets the devil that the faithful Job would never lose faith or denounce Him even if everything good was taken from Job. Job is literally tortured emotionally, mentally, and physically. Other than doubting God one time, which leads to the witnessing of the Leviathan...Job stays faithful and is rewarded with more prosperity than before he was tested. This question is one that Harold S. Kushner has asked as well in his book When Bad Things Happen to Good People. This man's son was taken from him at an early age. He began to ask this same question...Why would God purposely hurt us? Why would God create demons and evil spirits? Kushner sums it up as God does not intend to hurt us. He concludes that free will, nature, and genetics, which is uncontrollable by God, is what causes the disasters that lead to the hurt that we feel in our lives. Now I agree with this conclusion. Personally, I deal with the question on a daily basis. My 10 year old son, Karter, has psoriasis. This is an auto-immune disorder where the skins cells divide to fast and creates plaque on the skin. But it is more than that. He has dealt with this condition for 5 years. Currently he is at about 40% body coverage. It is painful! He has days were he can not wash his hair without help because it hurts to have water run over his hands or to touch his hair. He loses sleep because of pain and worrying about the condition. When this happened when he was 5 years old it was far worse. He questioned and still questions why God would put him through this. Now I agree with Kushner that God is not out to get us. Genetics is why Karter has psoriasis. Not some evil plan from God or evil spirits. Now when I think about this I try to imagine what I would think if I was alive 1,500 years ago. Would it be evil spirits? What else could be the cause? I am sure that I would believe that evil spirits are the cause. What I have a hard time with is the creation of biblical stories based on historical happenings. Asma discusses the 4 monsters that were described in Daniel 7:4-8 and makes a connection to the 4 empires: Babylon, Median Empire, Persian Empire, Greek/Macedonian Empire. Asma states, "the lion-eagle hybrid represents Babylon, the toothy bear represents the Median Empire, the four-headed leopard is the Persian Empire, and the egregious fourth beast is the Greek and Macedonian Empire" (69). Were the stories being created to make examples of bad mistakes or greed and to promote God? And is this still be used today? I hear people talk about how the devil will punish the bad. People still truly live in fear of God. Fear of God is still taught in Churches. I do not agree with this thought process. A God that created us from his love, is not a God to be feared. He is a God that should be followed and we should model ourselves after. I did find it interesting how much entertainment is pulled from biblical monsters, such as 666 and the mark of the devil. Favorite quote: "The Evil One is on God's side. He carries out the garbage" (64). Witches: Can I say "WOW!" General hysteria is never a good thing. In Cotton Mather's book he states, "The New-Englanders are a People of God settled in those, which were once the Devil's Territories" (14). Is this because the land was inhabited by Native American before the arrival of the British? Why was the land the Devil's territories? Just curious. If women were judged by the same standard today...wow, there would be burnings everyday. Or are women judged by the same standards? This makes me think of how Nancy Grace tore Britney Spears apart night after night? It is obvious that the phenomena of witchery was to explain the unexplainable. I was intrigued though that the touch of a witch could make a man think he had been castrated. And that the witch had the power to take that hallucination away. Was this just because witches were so believed in then? How can you convince someone that a part of their body has been removed when it clearly has not been? Much like the use of monsters to scare people into submission, witchcraft was created to scare people, judge people, and condemn people. I understand that there were unexplainable events and for people of this time witchcraft seemed reasonable. However, what about the people who used witchcraft as a ploy to gain political control? Or that it was a scape goat for promiscuous behavior. The message today is that if you are a woman and sleep around then you must be evil. Think about the movie 'Witches of Eastwick'. Those women were seen as sluts in their town. They were outcasts. They were being judged by the majority because they did not fit the social norm. However understanding the creation of accusations of witchcraft does explain the part of the judgement placed upon women today. I just can not imagine what life would have been like in 1600's and you were accused of being a witch. What do you say? Admit it and take your chances or deny it and pay the price? What kind of option is that? Witchcraft accusations are a continuance of man's need to control women. I believe that. It is born out of the notion of hysteria. Women are weak and can easily be persuaded by the devil. We are not strong enough to make decisions so some unknown force or evil spirit must be deciding for us. It has never paid to be a women and be seen outside of the box. Portrayals of women who think independently or could take care of themselves have always and still remain that those women are witches or some other evil doer. Kusher, Harold. When Bad Things Happen to Good People. New York: Random House, 1981