Standard Candle

Morristown-Beard School

standard candle 2012

-1-

standard candle Standard Candle (also called Candela) is a unit of luminous intensity used to measure, among other things, the brightness of the stars. It is equal to 1/60 of the luminous intensity per square centimeter of a black body radiating at the temperature of solidification of platinum (2,406 degrees K).

The Academic Annals of The Morristown-Beard School

Editor Nina Cammarata Editor-Elect Ashley Young Associate Editor Daniel Collins Staff Members Cynthia Tremonte Kyle Fisher Kevin Glancy Benjamin Miller Faculty Advisor Darren Lovelock Faculty Advisor Emeritus John Mascaro, Ph.D.

Cover by Ashley Young Download a PDF of this at www.mbs.net/StandardCandle/

A Note to the Reader:

T

he Morristown-Beard School is in a period of transition. With the full integration of the iPad this year, both students and faculty are continuously learning to adapt to a new, digital way of teaching and learning. As a society, we are in the process of bidding farewell to books and pencils in exchange for electronic applications and styluses. At school, we have all seen first hand the innumerable capabilites and advantages that going digital has to offer.

With any change, though, comes sacrifice. As the MorristownBeard School introduces technology further into its halls, we must acknowledge what we are giving up for this change. While the number of electronic reading applications and tools grows, the number of physical books diminishes. It is easy to see how today’s books could become tomorrow’s records, something of the past that a child born in 2012 might never encounter.

While electronic reading undoubtedly allows users countless benefits, it simply cannot recreate or capture the character of a tangible book. The experience of flipping through the pages of a novel or cracking the spine of a new book is something unmatched by the glaring screen of an iPad or e-reader. With that said, we encourage you to appreciate this state of transition, the ability to experience both the physical and the digital, and we hope that Standard Candle serves as a leading example, being offered both as a paper version and online.

As technology tranforms the Morristown-Beard School as a whole, changes are also affecting Standard Candle. We must say farewell to a group that has made up the majority of our editorial staff, our graduating seniors: Nina Cammarata, Cynthia Tremonte, Kyle Fisher, Kevin Glancy, and Benjamin Miller. Their efforts in the past few years have helped shape a collection of various works into accurate academic annals of the MorristownBeard School. We appreciate their contributions and hard work, and wish them the best of luck in their future endeavors. We hope to continue their legacy as we begin work on the 2013 issue of Standard Candle, in which we wish to bring new perspectives and ideas to the journal and the community. ~ A.Y.

Volume XII

Table of Contents Othello Ryan Casey The Rewards of Deception............................................................10 Drew Hagerstrom Othello Versus Othello..............................................................13 Pooja Aggarwal and Jacqueline Roth Artsy...........................................................................................................15 The Dead Cynthia Tremonte Light, Dark, and In Between........................................................16 Susanna Mathews Like a Phoenix From the Ashes....................................................20 Adrianna Aguayo Spanish Stucco with Clay Tile Roof......................................................23 World War II Andrew Kundrat Interwar Treaties: A Prominent Cause of World War II..........................................24 Julie Smith Power, Lies, and a Crippled Society: Propaganda in the Third Reich....................................................31 Peter Smith The Division of Post-War Europe.................................................39 Brettie Brier Two-Story Colonial with Two-Car Attached Garage........................43

Jane Eyre Ashley Young A Wife’s Confinement....................................................................44 Zoe Steinberg Steps to Marriage..........................................................................46 JD Parker Artsy...........................................................................................................50 Huckleberry Finn Sumiran Sapru Freedom and Suppression..............................................................51 Daniel Collins Situation and Adaptation.............................................................53 Tori Gonzalez Lake Side Log Cabin.................................................................................56 Miscellaneous Jacqueline McGinley Perfección.......................................................................................57 Eric Fernandez Risking Failure................................................................................59 Benjamin Leigh Geometric Constructions: The Art and Science of Creating Lengths, Angles, and Geometric Shapes......................................61 Dylan Iuzzolino Artsy..................................................................................................63 Jaynie Siegel The Turning Point to Reality......................................................64 Jared Silver Desire for Martyrdom..................................................................66

Standard Candle

Ryan Casey, ‘12

Submitted By Ida Picker

The Rewards of Deception

D o t h e l l o

eception is a powerful tool that can get one far in life. It is a skill that requires intelligence, cunning, and most importantly, selfishness. It is necessary for the victims of deception to be ignorant and naïve.

Throughout, Shakespeare’s tragedy Othello and Moliere’s comedy Tartuffe, two major characters, Iago and Tartuffe, are very different men from what they appear to be. Both characters use their evil talent of deception by attempting to triumph over all that is good and satisfy their greed and selfishness by deceiving those who trust them most. These two characters would not be able to succeed without the naivety of Othello and Orgon, on whom they constantly prey.

It is important in life to have a friend that one can trust no matter what the circumstance. It is just as important, however, to be extraordinarily careful in deciding who that person is. The great general Othello believes that Iago is exactly that person. He believes that he is a man whom he can trust more than his wife Desdemona and even more than his brave Lieutenant, Cassius, who has always been there for him. This soon turns out to be Othello’s fatal mistake:

I’ll pour this pestilence into his ear, That she repeals him for her body’s lust; And by how much she strives to do him good, She shall undo her credit with the Moor So will I turn her virtue into pitch, And out of her own goodness make the net That shall enmesh them all. (II.3.338-50)

One can see how poorly Othello has misinterpreted Iago’s character as Iago speaks of feeding only lies to him. Othello rests not just his own reputation on the shoulders of the nasty Iago, but the lives of those who are dearest to him. The wicked and intelligent Iago understands how much he is trusted and loved by Othello and uses this information to his advantage throughout the play. He fills Othello with lies that drive him out of his once sane mind. Iago is able to turn Othello, most logical and loving of men, into an irrational monster who can no longer control his own actions and destroys his own life and the lives of those who were truly dearest to him.

-10-

Morristown-Beard School

Trust is a privilege that often takes many years of honesty to earn. It is usually only awarded to family members and close friends.

This is unexpectedly not the case in Tartuffe, as Orgon makes remarkably irrational first opinions of Tartuffe without even knowing him well.

Tartuffe is only able to get away with his seemingly pious act because he is able to successfully deceive both Orgon and Madame Parnelle, who are much more naïve than any of their children. Their children and even their maid can clearly see right through the false mask that Tartuffe wears:

He’s proved his warm and grateful feelings toward you; It’s with a pair of horns he would reward you.

Yes, I surprised him with your wife, and heard His whole adulterous offer, every word.

She, with her all too gentle disposition, Would not have told you of his proposition; But I shall not make terms with brazen lechery, And feel that not to tell you would be treachery. (Elmire 96)

Even though many of the characters are able to detect the falseness and lies that are hidden within Tartuffe, it does not matter because he has deceived Orgon, the only person who he needed to in order to get what he wants--all of Orgon’s wealth and property:

Why worry about the man? Each day he grows More gullible; one can lead him by the nose.

To find us here would fill him with delight, And if he saw the worst, he’d doubt his sight. (Tartuffe 128)

Tartuffe finally accidentally reveals the truth that is hidden away beneath the layers of lies and throws away his deceiving act, which was his only key to his evil intentions.

It is important to understand that deception can only be successfully achieved if the ones who are being victimized by deception are naïve and trust the offender. This ignorance and undeserved trust are the primary factors in the formula of deception. Both Othello and Orgon share this same naivety. They have raised Iago and Tartuffe high on pedestals. Iago and Tartuffe both understand that they are being completely misunderstood and selfishly use this knowledge to their advantage by further eliciting Othello’s -11-

o t h e l l o

Standard Candle

o t h e l l o

and Orgon’s trust before going behind their backs and destroying their lives.

One might wonder what benefits could possibly come from deceiving innocent people who trust deceivers like family members. But for Iago and Tartuffe the benefit is quite simple. Both experience a rush of sinful joy that creates a need for even more as they trick Othello and Orgon. For the hurtful lies that these two men produce against people who trust them, they are rewarded with riches and honor from both Othello and Orgon, most definitely satisfying their greed and selfishness. Their deception, however, comes with a high price as their lies eventually go too far causing their true selfish selves to be revealed and their entire plan lost. However, the scars of their lies have already been cut across the hearts of Othello and Orgon.

Orgon’s inability to see the truth is very much like Othello’s. He trusts a man he does not truly know and this hurts him. His closest family members advise him against his unjust love and trust for Tartuffe, but Orgon’s ignorance only rejects the truth that his family is desperately trying to help him see by banishing his own son from his home. It also permits the deception that Tartuffe is inflicting on Orgon when he signs over his wealth and property to Tartuffe, which ultimately proves Orgon’s total ignorance of the situation, and fulfills the formula that proves Tartuffe’s deceiving abilities to be a complete success.

Greed and Selfishness are the sole motivators for deception while naivety and ignorance are the two key factors that allow the evil of deception to succeed. Deceivers drag others down in order for them to get ahead in life, which is exactly what Iago and Tartuffe attempt to do. Deception has proven to be the most effective catalyst in both stories as it drives two villains to do terrible things for themselves while ruining the lives of everyone who trusted them most. Naivety and ignorance are the flawed characteristics that prevent the truth from being seen. Both Othello and Orgon possess these two deadly traits that lead their lives to ruin. Therefore, two sides are necessary for deception to occur. The first is the evil intentions of one whose lies and selfishness come before all else; the second is the ignorant and often innocent one who has unfortunately trusted someone with such flawed character traits. The almost identical similarities between Iago and Tartuffe and Othello and Orgon prove this point precisely.

-12-

Morristown-Beard School

Drew Hagerstrom, ‘12

Submitted By Samara Landers, Ph.D.

Othello Versus Othello

A

s the protagonist of Othello, a Shakespearean tragedy, Othello is destined to be a dynamic character whose initial purity and poise fall prey to the shortcomings of human nature. Othello’s opening speech in act 5, scene 2 provides the reader with a contrast between his fundamental goodness and his tragic flaws. Furthermore, the contrast exposes Othello’s incapability of suppressing these weaknesses. Othello is a noble character who struggles with the vices of human nature; while both his good and evil sides are exposed in this speech, the triumph of the latter is clear.

Othello’s imaginative rhetoric is his most noble, heroic quality.

In this speech, Othello demonstrates his eloquence through various creative metaphors, heavenly references, and rhetorical devices. His description of Desdemona sleeping exemplifies these qualities; he describes her skin as “smooth as monumental alabaster” (5.2.5) and refers to her as the “cunning’st pattern of excelling nature” (5.2.11). Rather than planning on killing her, he intends on having “plucked thy rose” (5.2.13) and “put out thy light” (5.2.10). His speech is pleasant not only to the mind, but also to the ear; the alliteration of the letter “s” in “shed”, “scar”, “skin”, and “snow” (5.2.3-4) and the letter “b” in “balmy breath” (5.2.16) entrances the listener.

Also indicative of Othello’s noble character is his biblical allusion; by stating “This sorrow’s heavenly; / It strikes where it doth love” (5.2.21-22) in reference to “whom the Lord loveth he chasenth” (Hebrews 12:6), Othello adds a peaceful undertone to a malicious act. Up to this point, Othello’s language has correlated with his collapse, becoming increasingly vulgar. However, the revival of Othello’s eloquence indicates his fundamental rectitude.

Although his speech is syntactically dazzling, the actual uses and implications of his rhetoric reveal Othello’s emotional weaknesses. In his first lines, Othello attempts to justify his murdering of Desdemona and free himself of guilt by blaming his actions on “the cause” (5.2.1) rather than on his own jealousy. In this section, he repeats this phrase in an effort to emphasize that he is not responsible for the murder he is about to commit. Othello’s diction further demonstrates this idea, as he implies that his course of action is right by using the word “must” in the phrase “she must die, else she’ll betray more men” (5.2.6). Another revealing aspect of Othello’s speech is -13-

o t h e l l o

Standard Candle

o t h e l l o

his metaphorical language. It is clear, given his intentions in this scene, that Othello uses figurative phrases as euphemisms in order to mask his villainous intentions. By using the phrases “put out thy light” (5.2.10) and “plucked thy rose” (5.2.13), Othello dehumanizes Desdemona, in effect releasing himself of moral wrongdoings. As Othello concludes his speech, he tactically speaks in a manner that makes him the victim of Desdemona’s death, using phrases such as “I must weep” (5.2.20) to drive home this point. The most notable example of this is the aforementioned biblical allusion in which he states, “It strikes where it doth love” (5.2.22). By changing the subject from “I” to “it,” Othello renders himself free of guilt. Although these phrases are ostensibly indicative of Othello’s nobility, the motives behind them reveal Othello’s evils.

Just as Julius Caesar, Hamlet, King Lear, and all of Shakespeare’s tragic heroes do, Othello succumbs to the inevitable path of a Shakespearean tragedy in which the hero is doomed to human nature’s flaws. The clash between Othello’s desire for Desdemona and his jealousy is evident in the contrasting emotions in his speech. However, when the true meaning is unveiled, Othello’s noble speech can be seen as an attempt to mask his guilt.

-14-

Morristown-Beard School

Pooja Aggarwal and Jacqueline Roth, ‘14 Submitted By Mark Hartman

a r t s y

-15-

Standard Candle

Cynthia Tremonte, ‘12

Submitted By John Mascaro, Ph.D.

Light, Dark and In Between

I t h e d e a d

n his short story “The Dead,” James Joyce utilizes many types of physical imagery to represent the issues the characters have to endure. In particular, the contrast between light and dark gives some insight into the lives of characters like Gabriel, Gretta, and Michael Furey. Light and dark can represent the differences between sophistication and earthliness, knowledge and ignorance, and life and death. These differences are shown at different times throughout the story before the end scene. By the end, Gabriel’s versions of light and dark are revolutionized by his final revelations.

Joyce uses these ideas of light and dark imagery to show the stark differences between characters and how these differences influence their worlds.

Gabriel and Gretta are very different from each other on the surface in that they come from different backgrounds and thus see things in various ways. For instance, when Gabriel “was in a dark part of the hall” (210), he saw that the darkness made his wife’s dress appear in “black and white” (211) instead of their actual earth tones. Gabriel sees everything in “black and white” and sees things as straightforward and explainable. He is unable to understand concepts that cannot be reasoned, like emotions and human life. Gretta, on the other hand, is full of emotions, and so in that scene is portrayed in stark contrast to the darkness; Gabriel would paint her such that her “hat would show off the bronze of her hair against the darkness and the dark panels of her skirt would show off the light ones” (211). While Gretta radiates with passion, Gabriel is so self-absorbed that he cannot even see the true feelings of his wife from this picture that he would paint of her.

Furthermore, the light shows the purity of Gretta and people of the country and the corruption of Gabriel and the city. As Gabriel and his wife are going into the hotel on their way home, the scene is opened with the morning being “still dark” (214) and having a “dull yellow light [brooding] over the houses and the river” (214). This scene already foreshadows the disaster of their bedroom encounter, but it also shows the difference between the city and the suburbs. The city is dark and has “lamps [that] were still burning redly in the murky air” (214). These lamps shine an ominous light, making the city seem menacing, while the houses and the river, evoking a sense of nature, have a soft-colored light rising over them. Since Gabriel is from the city, the reader -16-

Morristown-Beard School

can see his unfeeling personality reflected in this description of the city. Gretta, on the other hand, is more provincial, softer and pure, and represents the personality of the countryside as depicted by Joyce. These opposite characteristics, revealed by the opposing amounts of light, show how Gabriel is darker since he is metropolitan while Gretta is brighter since she is from the country.

Throughout the story, the reader notices that Gabriel is somewhat shortsighted and ignorant of the occurrences around him, especially his wife’s emotions. Gabriel is left figuratively “in the dark” in that he cannot figure out things around him. At the end of the story, Gabriel tells the porter that they “don’t want any light” (217). On the surface, one can see how Gabriel has already assumed that he will have a romantic night with his wife even though his wife has no interest. However, we can also see this lack of light as Gabriel wishing to remain unaware of his own wife and his surroundings and not see the light. He also adds that they “have light enough from the street” (217). The idea of the city corrupting people shows how Gabriel is so urbane that he wants the light from the street, not natural light, to give him direction. However, the light from the street is “a ghostly light from the street lamp” (217), making the scene gloomy and deathly. The idea of the city corrupting is brought up again; Gabriel is trying to impose the city onto Gretta, but she is still tied to the country. Even though Gabriel tries to make Gretta be who he wants her to be, she will not change.

When she stops to listen to the Lass of Aughrim, the reader sees how Gretta’s reminiscing reveals her own self while Gabriel is incapable of understanding her feelings. Gretta stops to listen “under the dusty fanlight and the flame of the gas lit up the rich bronze of her hair” (213) while Gabriel watches her. Gretta at that moment is thinking of Michael. The fact that she had fallen in love at some point during her life makes her different from Gabriel.

This love made her enlightened in a sense in that she understands human compassion while Gabriel cannot; the light falling on her illuminates the fact that she is more knowledgeable in this way. Her hair is additionally covered in light, also alluding to her inner light and strength. The light, however, is dusty, which can remind us of old age or of haziness. Gretta’s memories are old and somewhat forgotten and hazy, as shown from the fact that she cannot remember the song’s name. The dust and the forgetfulness also show how Gretta’s life is now not as earthly and enlightened as it once was; her life with Gabriel is now controlled, and she is no longer free to feel her own emotions.

Gabriel’s lack of connection with his wife is illuminated by the couple’s interactions with their surroundings. As Gabriel discovers that Gretta is -17-

t h e d e a d

Standard Candle

t h e d e a d

not interested in having sex, he emotionally pushes her away. The first time Gabriel turned “with his back to the light” (217) was when he first called to Gretta in the bedroom. He is turning away from Gretta’s world and from true understanding by turning away from the light; he does not understand, nor does he want to understand, that Gretta may not be thinking exactly what he wants her to think. By turning away from the light, he is turning away from others and focusing on himself. Gabriel moves away from the light a second time, “instinctively [turning] his back once more to the light” (221). This time, Gabriel has just found out about Gretta’s former love. He is trying to hide “the shame that burned upon his forehead” by turning away, but he is also turning away because he has now realized that he cannot connect with his wife and that he is separated from other people. Gretta, on the other hand, is looking “away from him along the shaft of light” (221). She is the complete opposite of her husband, both in direction, in luminescence, and in personality.

Light can represent the distinction between life and death, both physically and metaphorically. On the physical level, Michael Furey has “big dark eyes” (220) and Gretta is always surrounded by light, revealing that Michael is no longer alive and Gretta is still in the world of the living. Also, as Gabriel is contemplating death, he says that the people he knows who are dying “were all becoming shades” (224). Gabriel is always portrayed as dark. While Gabriel may not be physically dead, he is emotionally. He cannot connect with people on a human level and has never and will never experience a deep relationship with anyone. At the end of the story, Gabriel says how his “own identity was fading into a grey impalpable world” (224-225). While he may have been talking about death, we can see that he may be talking about a life that is between passion and emotionlessness. While Gabriel has always lived his life in the dark, he now sees that life can be about love, but Gabriel admits that “he had never felt like that towards any woman” (224). Michael Furey is also in this world, acting as the “form of a young man” that Gabriel sees in the “partial darkness” (224). However, Michael is the opposite; he is physically dead but is emotionally alive. Thus, these two characters are trapped in a world where they are neither dead nor alive, in between light and dark.

The snow that is mentioned throughout the story and brought back at the very end reveals the influence of light on the world. At the beginning of the story, Gabriel enters the party with “a light fringe of snow… on the shoulders of his overcoat” (177). Although the word “light” is not used in the same sense of the word as has been discussed, Gabriel is still bringing in light snow, not heavy or dark colored. On the other hand, at -18-

Morristown-Beard School

the very end of the story, the snow is completely different; it is “silver and dark” (225). One could argue that Gabriel is seeing the snow in this way because he is part of a grey or silver world. However, it could also be seen as Joyce’s way of describing how everywhere was becoming dead and emotionless since the snow “was general all over Ireland” (225). Since the story favors the countryside, the growing depersonalization from the city and increasing industrialization could be why all of Ireland was dark. The snow became darker once Gabriel was able to see how deep he was in the dark.

Light and dark have many meanings to the different characters in “The Dead,” ranging from earthliness to enlightenment to life. Joyce implicitly shows the reader how Gretta, who is down to earth and not very cosmopolitan, has more humanity than does Gabriel. Like the other short stories in Dubliners, Joyce leaves the reader at the end of the story unsure, particularly about Gabriel’s own soul and sense of self since Gabriel is in an in-between state of light and dark; we cannot be sure whether Gabriel will choose to become more understanding or whether he will continue to be self-centered and passionless. The light mimics Gabriel’s multi-dimensional personality and leaves the reader to see through the light to try to guess Gabriel’s true intentions.

t h e d e a d

-19-

Standard Candle

Susanna Matthews, ‘12

Submitted By John Mascaro, Ph.D.

Like a Phoenix From the Ashes

T t h e d e a d

he faults of Gabriel Conroy in James Joyce’s short story “The Dead” are undoubtedly numerous. His desire to be in control of situations in addition to his view of himself in relation to others makes for multiple interesting moments during the story. But traits that first appear as minor blunders eventually present themselves as deep inner conflicts within his mind and soul as he tries to define himself within his world. While his inner conflicts are revealed in different ways, they all share the common source of Gabriel’s need for validation through the approval of others. He himself is not aware of his inner life until the end of the story, when a personal realization forces him to question everything he has ever known. As Gabriel comes to a conclusion about who he is and his place in the world, he cannot cope with the realization that his life has been a lie. It is at this moment that his inner conflicts truly take control over Gabriel’s mind and soul as he experiences a breakdown of his identity and is challenged to change his life.

While all of Gabriel’s inner conflicts can be traced back to self-image, they are revealed in a few different ways. One way is through the role Gabriel plays as he interacts with people. In the first pages of the story Gabriel quips, “ I suppose we’ll be going to your wedding one of these fine days with your young man, eh?” and deeply insults the maid Lily (177). He tries to play his comment off as a joke but is unsuccessful. This particular interaction displays how Gabriel’s attempts to create a bond with people end in failure. This is caused largely by his need to play a role to feel at ease. He has plans to avoid a similar fate of failure as he prepares himself to recite his speech and is “undecided about the lines from Robert Browning for he feared it would above some of their heads…they would think that he was airing his superior education” and worries that “he would fail just as he had failed with the girl in the pantry” (177). His worries illustrate just how concerned he is with the thoughts and perception of others and how he allows it to define him as a success or failure. Gabriel concentrates so intensely on the possibility of failure that all other components of human interaction are lost on him. So intense is the fear that he becomes possessed by it and allows it to occupy his mind at all times.

Fear of failure is something that dictates Gabriel’s every move and forces him to think through his actions constantly. He is incapable of sim-20-

Morristown-Beard School

ply allowing things to happen and must be in control at all times. Multiple images of control appear during the story, the most obvious being when he is asked to carve the goose and thinks how he “liked nothing better than to find himself at the head of a well-laid table” (197). Being in control of a situation gives him comfort and a sense of power, as does being in control of other people. His wife Gretta is the one person with whom he does not need to worry about failure, but it is she that he exerts the most control over, “insisting that whenever it’s wet underfoot” that she wear her galoshes (180). Gretta offers Gabriel the most validation as a person and he uses her acceptance as a way to hide his insecurities. Gabriel’s need for control over situations and people is yet another inner conflict and it is his control over life that is threatened at the end of the story. Once he comes to learn about his wife’s relationship with Michael Furey, his sense of power over his wife and his relationship with her are gone. He finds that his own identity is “fading out into a grey impalpable world” as he loses not just control, but the sense of validation he had previously gleaned from his marriage (225). That is the reason for all of Gabriel’s inner conflicts: because he cannot find validation in himself and his existence, he looks to others to do it for him. But when he fails and they reject him, he ends up in a worse position than before.

Gabriel’s awareness of his inner life is minimal, but it does exist.

He is vaguely aware of his insecurities but works desperately to hide them.

Gabriel manipulates his insecurities in order to save him from discomfort.

By doing so, he does not confront them at any point during the story. It is not until he is faced with the idea that his wife may not be able to offer him the validation he needs to function that he begins to question his life. Once he stops to consider “how poor a part he, her husband, had played in her life” the realization shakes him to his core (223). He relied so much on the support and love that she offered him to compensate for his personal conflicts that once her support is no longer there, his insecurities and imagined discomforts become realities too much for him to bear. It is at this moment that Gabriel is aware of his inner life and his soul approaches “that region where dwell the vast hosts of the dead” (224). Without the constant praise and support from his wife, Gabriel questions every aspect of his life and his character. In thinking about Gretta’s relationship with Michael Furey and Michael’s subsequent death, Gabriel comes to the conclusion that it is better for one to “pass boldly into that other world, in the full glory of some passion, than fade and wither dismally with age” (224). It is the latter fate that Gabriel has resigned himself to. Faced with the prospect of an emp-21-

t h e d e a d

Standard Candle

t h e d e a d

ty, meaningless life Gabriel is tasked with defining a new identity for himself. The question that remains is if he will be able to create one by himself.

After he has lost his identity along with his relationship, Gabriel has two choices. He can either drift into a world of dead souls and nothingness, or he can rise out of this situation and create a new opportunity. For so long Gabriel’s inner conflicts have harnessed him and dictated who he is, but now that he is aware of his conflicts he can work to resolve them. By addressing the fact that his life is not as content as he might have liked, he opens himself to the possibility for personal improvement. It is not until the denouement of the story that this new kind of acceptance takes place. The image of snow throughout the story suggests Gabriel’s cold nature towards the world as Joyce uses it to separate Gabriel from other people: “how pleasant it would be to walk alone, first by the river and then through the park” (192). As the story draws to a close “the snow falling faintly through the universe” symbolizes a new start for Gabriel (225). Just as the snow creates a new world physically, Gabriel’s personal realization of his internal struggles has begun to create a new world for him. He does not completely resolve his inner conflicts, for one cannot do that in a short amount of time, but the falling snow suggests that “the time had come for him to set out on his journey westward” and begin to define himself as an individual (225). Looking further into the concept of ‘ journeying westward’ this sentence refers to Gabriel traveling west of Dublin, possibly to reconnect with his Irish side. A part of him that he had earlier rejected, “I’m sick of my own country, sick of it,” he now looks deeper into himself and into Ireland to figure out who he is (190). The internal conflicts that had plagued him so deeply earlier in the story are now the fuel that he will use to ignite his new life.

Gabriel’s quest for a new beginning stems from his discovery that his perceptions are not what they seem to be. He had lived for the praise and approval of other people for so long that after he discovers the truth about his marriage, he does not know where to turn. Gabriel’s need for the acceptance of other people is a direct result of his inner conflicts. By finally opening his mind to the idea of re-creating himself, he begins to extricate himself from the web of previous internal conflicts.

-22-

Morristown-Beard School

Adrianna Aguayo, ‘12

Submitted By Richard Timek

a r c h i t e c t u r e -23-

Standard Candle

Andrew Kundrat, ‘12

Submitted By Mark Jones, Ph.D.

INTERWAR TREATIES: A PROMINENT CAUSE OF WORLD WAR II

w o r l d w a r II

“G

erman society, from one end to the other of the political spectrum, was caught in an almost universal consensus for revision.

They did not like the terms of the [Versailles] treaty; many Germans were, in fact, not convinced that they had even lost the war. They saw this treaty as a diktat, a dictated peace, one that was unfair and unjust and meant to cripple Germany.”1 After World War I, the Allied Powers were determined to prevent another great war and created a strict set of treaties and organizations in order to collectively secure the safety of Europe. However, over time these treaties became more lenient, especially towards Germany, and Germany’s rise to power came virtually unchallenged. The ‘unfair’ Treaty of Versailles and subsequent interwar treaties gave the Germans both a reason to be upset with the Allied Powers and unrestricted freedom through appeasement, effectively dooming Europe to another major conflict. Earlier interwar treaties, particularly the Paris Settlement, increased tension between allies and defeated powers with their ‘dictated peace’ and refusal to give the Central Powers negotiation rights. Towards the end of the interwar period, treaties brought together aggressive and dangerous countries that felt offended by the Paris Settlement. By 1938, the alliance of Italy and Germany and the appeasement policy made another global war not only likely but inevitable.

This paper will address several interwar treaties and formations of alliances that sparked conflict and made Europe more vulnerable to another great war.

The Paris Peace Conference and its Treaties

The 1919 Paris Peace Conference was a meeting among the World War I victors to decide the fate of the defeated powers. It was built around Woodrow Wilson’s ideas of self-determination and nationalism plus the Allied desire for peace and security. Self-determination is the idea that every ethnicity should have the right to form their own nation-state and choose their government. Nationalism is the desire of any nationality to form its own nation-state and be free from the rule of another nationality.

Both of these terms were expressed in Woodrow Wilson’s Fourteen Points, and a majority of the conference’s regulations were based on these ideas.

-24-

Morristown-Beard School

Due to the fact that a majority of World War I was not fought on German soil, many Germans did not see the war as a loss, but rather a stalemate. Therefore, the territorial losses and reparations imposed on Germany in the Treaty of Versailles seemed harsh and unfair. Among the territorial losses that Germany suffered following World War I (see Figure 1), they lost Alsace-Lorraine to France, regions of eastern Germany to Czechoslovakia, regions of western Germany to Belgium, and a large portion of eastern Germany to Poland. Furthermore, Germany was forced to give up the Saar district and the city of Danzig to the League of Nations and the city of Memel to Lithuania; all of these territories were predominantly German and therefore this ruling contradicted the idea of nationalism. Germany also lost all of its overseas territories, including mostly small Pacific islands and African countries. In addition to losing several territories and regions, many German officers were charged with war crimes and Germany was deemed guilty of aggression and imposing war on the Allies. Finally, Germany was forced to pay reparations to the Allied powers, which were expected to total $5 billion by 1921 and even more after 1921.2

The League of Nations, also established during the Paris Peace Conference, attempted to secure peace through collective security instead of the previous balance-of-power system. However, there were serious problems that prevented this league from keeping peace in the foreseeable future. The League of Nations lacked the support and stability of great powers as members. Since Germany had lost the war, it was not invited to be a member.

Russia, who had surrendered to German forces during the war, was not invited because it was no longer an Allied power. The United States opted out of the League due to its isolationist desires. Great Britain and France, both members, suffered severe casualties and economic problems during World War I and thus did not have the stability or the security to uphold the League.

Both the Treaty of Versailles and the League of Nations increased the vulnerability of Europe to another major conflict. Both were initiated in order to secure peace between the powers of Europe, but the ‘harsh’ terms of the Versailles Treaty and the false sense of security that the League of Nations provided made a war increasingly probable. Due to the fact that many Germans were not convinced that they had lost the war, the Treaty of Versailles made the German people angry, provoked, and aggressive. The lack of strength in the League of Nations, a ‘toothless tiger,’ gave Europe an artificial sense of peace and thus contributed to the failure of France and Great Britain to recognize a serious threat to their much-desired peace. The terms of the Paris -25-

w o r l d w a r II

Standard Candle

w o r l d w a r II

Peace Conference ultimately created an unstable peace and a tense Europe.

Similarly, the Treaty of St. Germain attempted to dissolve the Austro-Hungarian Empire through the idea of nationalism (see Figure 2). Austria and Hungary were to be two separate countries, and the Empire lost a large northern territory to Czechoslovakia, small southern territories to Italy, a large region to northern Yugoslavia, and a large territory to Romania. This landlocked Austria and greatly lessened its control of Europe. Many Austrians were upset with these losses and restrictions because, like Germans, they thought the terms were too harsh and unfair. The anger of the Austrian people was another major factor in Axis aggression and in the instability of Europe during the interwar years. This common animosity toward Allied regulations and restrictions between Germany and Austria created a bond between the two countries that added to their cultural similarities.

This relationship would eventually lead to the German annexation of Austria, despite the fact that the Allies had forbidden a union between the two.

The 1912 Washington Naval Treaty

Another prominent cause of interwar tension was the 1921 Washington Naval Treaty that attempted to limit the navies of the United States, Great Britain, France, Italy, and Japan in order to prevent a global arms race.

In principle, the treaty would help decrease the likelihood of a naval arms race between five major world powers. However, like the Treaties of Versailles and St. Germain, it was considered unfair to Japan and Italy and also an attempt to create naval domination by Great Britain and the United States. In the treaty, Great Britain and the United States were each given limitations of 525,000 capital ship tonnage, while Japan was given a 315,000 limitation, and France and Italy were each given limitations of 175,000. Also, Japan’s aircraft carrier tonnage was limited to 81,000, while Great Britain and the United States each had limitations of 135,000 and France and Italy 60,000. Furthermore, the United States and Great Britain were allowed to retain ships with total tonnages of 525,850 and 558,950, while Italy and Japan were limited to 182,800 and 301,320. Although this treaty helped to prevent a naval arms race, it gave the upper hand to Great Britain and the United States if a naval conflict arose.

Japan, a maritime empire, and Italy were therefore also angered by the Allied attempt to dominate the world through treaties, regulations, and limitations.3,4

The 1921 Treaty of Rapallo

The Treaty of Rapallo was signed in 1921 by Germany and the Soviet -26-

Morristown-Beard School

Union. It strengthened the economic connection between the two countries and was the first sign of German and Soviet cooperation, which would eventually lead to the 1939 Non-Aggression Pact. Germany and the Soviet Union were beginning to cooperate, which could easily challenge the weak collective security system in place. This agreement had the potential to threaten European stability and the Allies’ restrictions and limitations on Germany.5

The Allied Desire for Peace: 1925 Locarno Pacts and 1928 Kellogg-Briand Peace Pact

The 1925 Locarno Pacts were signed by Germany, Great Britain, France, Belgium, and Italy in attempt to uphold peace in Europe. The main stipulation of the treaty was that Germany must not attack Belgium or France and vice versa. Also, it attempted to maintain the demilitarization of the Rhineland and all terms of the 1919 Treaty of Versailles. The treaty was essentially another attempt to limit the power of Germany and prevent any German aggression. The terms of the treaty would have contributed to European peace had Germany and France been willing to uphold it, but that was not the case. Through the Locarno Pacts, Germany regained its status as a negotiator, but this treaty was strictly beneficial to Belgium, France, and Great Britain since Belgium and France posed little threat to Germany. Rather, it was a French and Belgian action in fear of further German aggression. The treaty was beneficial to Great Britain because it attempted to limit the power of Germany, and it would create a buffer zone, Belgium, between Germany and itself. The Locarno Pacts ultimately contributed to the Allied chokehold on German growth and thus made Germany more apt to military response to break these limitations and restrictions.6

The Kellogg-Briand Peace Pact, signed in 1928, was another futile attempt to prevent aggression with the “general understanding that the right of self-defense is implicit in sovereignty.”7 Article I of the pact stated that “The High Contracting Parties solemnly declare in the names of their respective peoples that they condemn recourse to war for the solution of international controversies, and renounce it, as an instrument of national policy in their relations with one another.” The ‘High Contracting Parties’ included Germany, the United States, Belgium, France, Great Britain, Italy, Japan, Poland, and Czechoslovakia.8 This pact set no stipulations or restrictions to prevent peace; it simply stated that all disputes “shall never be sought except by pacific means.”9 This pact contributed to the false sense of security that existed throughout Europe, which made it more dif-27-

w o r l d w a r II

Standard Candle

w o r l d w a r II

ficult for France and Great Britain to recognize a serious threat to peace.

Appeasement and Germany’s Rise to Power

Due to the power of Germany and the decreasing desire to anger its government, the Allied Powers began adopting the idea of appeasement. Appeasement was the belief in pacifying Germany to prevent war by giving its government what it wanted, which proved to be a disastrous mistake. The first signs of appeasement were evident in the decrease in severity from the 1924 Dawes Plan to the 1929 Young Plan. In the Dawes Plan, Germany was to pay gradually increasing reparations, from one billion gold marks to over two billion, over five years while they would receive an annual foreign loan of 800 million gold marks to stabilize the German economy.10 The Young Plan, introduced in 1929, reduced Germany’s total reparations to roughly 118 billion gold marks. This was a far smaller figure than the original 266 billion imposed on Germany in the Treaty of Versailles.11 This gradual reduction both angered Germans and made the Allies’ impositions seem unenforced and weak.12

The Rome-Berlin Axis was a 1936 alliance between Germany’s Hitler and Italy’s Mussolini, both of whom were dictators. The alliance aligned two major European powers and heavily increased Hitler’s influence on Italy, his junior partner. This gave Hitler more power and created a combination that could challenge the Allies’ control of Europe. If a conflict arose between the Allies and Germany, Hitler would now have external support and the ability to wage a twofront war against France. Also, the Allies would now be less interested in waging war against Germany as Italy’s support could give the advantage to Hitler.

German interwar aggression began in 1936, when Hitler began remilitarization of the Rhineland Occupation Zone, a designated buffer zone between Germany and France. As stipulated in the Treaty of Versailles, the Rhineland was to be demilitarized to prevent Germany from attacking France. However, the last French troops left in 1930, and Hitler predicted that France would do nothing to counter his advances.13 In fact, Hitler himself stated: “The forty-eight hours after the march into the Rhineland were the most nerve-racking in my life. If the French had then marched into the Rhineland, we would have had to withdraw with our tails between our legs…”14 After that moment, Hitler realized that Allied appeasement would allow him to take whatever he wanted, and Germany’s aggression began.

In an attempt to expand his ‘Greater German Nation’ and take advantage of the Allies’ appeasement, Hitler demanded that the Sudetenland, Germany’s Czech border, be given to his empire. The Sudetenland had both -28-

Morristown-Beard School

ethnic Germans and Czechs, and the Allies unsurprisingly agreed to give the land to Germany in the Munich Agreement. This agreement, signed in 1938, showed how determined the Allies were to appease Hitler and their inability to recognize a threat to European stability. The pact was signed between Germany, Britain, France, and Italy and the fact that the Czechoslovak government had no say in the matter showed that Hitler truly could take whatever he wanted with the Allies behind him. This lack of Allied resistance gave Hitler absolute control of Europe and created a very unstable atmosphere.15

The treaty that made another war inevitable was the 1939 Non-Aggression Pact between Germany and the Soviet Union, signed just days before the official start of World War II. Both Germany and the Soviet Union had reasons for signing this pact: it allowed time for the Soviets to recover from WWI, the Russian Revolution, and Joseph Stalin’s political purges; and Germany was able to focus on its western border. This pact meant that Germany would avoid a potential two-front war and thus be able to concentrate its army and expand its territory westward. Once this agreement was signed, Germany became Europe’s dominant force without any capable unified opposition.16

If you have ever been in a courtroom during a criminal law case, you would hear the phrase, “means, motive, and opportunity.” These three aspects need to be proved in order to confirm the defendant’s ability to commit the crime. Similarly, in order to spark World War II, Germany needed means, motive, and opportunity. Germany’s capable armed forces, their alliance with Italy and Japan, and their Non-Aggression Pact with the Soviet Union certainly provided them with the means of participating in a global war. Germany’s motive is linked directly to the ‘harsh’ terms imposed on them in the Paris Peace Conference, the Locarno Pacts, and several other treaties. The opportunity was given to Germany through the Allies’ appeasement and their inability to act against Hitler during the interwar period. By the time World War II had started, the Axis Powers, Germany, Italy, and Japan, were too powerful to control.

If the Allies had been able to prevent one of these three aspects of the crime, Germany would have been stopped. To prevent German aggression, the Allies had to either treat Germany moderately or stay true to their 1919 impositions and continuously contain Germany’s growth. In short, the Allies’ inability to back their words with actions, as shown through treaties and agreements, unleashed an aggressive Germany and doomed Europe to another great war.

1 War, Peace, and Power: Diplomatic History of Europe, 1500-2000. 2007. The Teaching Company, directed by Vejas Gabriel Luilevicius, DVD. 2 Richard Goff, Walter Moss, Janice Terry, Jiu-Hwa Upshur, and Michael Schroeder. 2008. The Twentieth

-29-

w o r l d w a r II

Standard Candle

w o r l d

Century and Beyond: A Brief Global History, 7th Edition. New York: McGraw-Hill.

3 About.com. 2011. <http://militaryhistory.about.com/gi/o.htm?zi=1/XJ&zti=1&sdn=militaryhistory&cdn= education&tm=9&f=20&tt=11&bt=0&bts=0&zu=http://www.ibiblio.org/pha/pre-war/1922/nav_lim.html>, 9 March 2011. Original document: Papers Relating to the Foreign Relations of the United States: 1922, Vol. 1, pp. 247-266 listed in source.

4 Arthur N. Holcombe. 1932. The Future of the Washington Conference Treaties. The American Political Science Review 26(3): 491-517.

5 Yale Law School. 2011. <http://avalon.law.yale.edu/20th_century/rapallo_001.asp>, 10 March 2011. Original document listed in source.

6 Yale Law School. 2011. <http://avalon.law.yale.edu/20th_century/locarno_001.asp>, 10 March 2011.

Original document listed in source.

7 Charles Cheney Hyde. 1941. Secretary Hull on the Kellogg-Briand Pact. The American Journal of International Law 35(1): 117-118.

8 Yale Law School. 2011. <http://www.yale.edu/lawweb/avalon/imt/kbpact.htm>, 10 March 2011. Original document listed in source.

9 Yale Law School. 2011. <http://www.yale.edu/lawweb/avalon/imt/kbpact.htm>, 10 March 2011. Original document listed in source.

10 Indiana University. 2011. <http://www.indiana.edu/~league/1924.htm>, 10 March 2011.

11 Claire Suddath. 2010. Why Did World War I Just End? Time Online, 20 October.

12 R. R. Kuczynski. 1926. A Year of the Dawes Plan. Foreign Affairs 4(2): 254-263.

13 Richard Goff, et al. 2008. The Twentieth Century and Beyond. New York: McGraw-Hill.

14 William L. Shirer. 1990. The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich: a History of Nazi Germany. New York: Simon & Schuster, pg. 293.

15 Yale Law School. 2011. < http://avalon.law.yale.edu/imt/munich1.asp>, 3 April 2011. Original document listed in source.

16 Yale Law School. 2011. < http://avalon.law.yale.edu/20th_century/nonagres.asp>, 3 April 2011. Original document listed in source.

w a r II

-30-

Morristown-Beard School

Julie Smith, ‘12

Submitted By Mark Jones, Ph. D.

Power, Lies, and a Crippled Society: Propaganda in the Third Reich

T

o create a fire, one needs only three ingredients: tinder, a spark, and a fan for the flames. In fact, anyone who has ever built a fire learns quickly that without the last ingredient, the other two are rendered useless. The fire that consumed Germany in the 1930s was no different. In this analogy, the tinder is the historic prejudices of Europe that many Germans happened to share, the spark Hitler himself, and the fan for the flames the propaganda machine. Throughout the 1930s, Nazis in Germany encountered numerous failures in their attempt to gain power and support. Not until Hitler appointed Joseph Goebbels– a young, angry propagandist– was the Third Reich successful in its seizure of political, social and economic control.

Though Hitler manipulated previously established European prejudices, he was able to sway an entire nation’s will towards his vision by establishing a competently managed and ubiquitous propaganda machine and used it not only to assume power but also to wield power. This paper will trace the evolution and the impact of this propaganda machine. First, it will outline the principles of propaganda. Second, it will provide a short biography of Joseph Goebbels, the chief architect of Nazi propaganda, and his instrumental role in the rise of Hitler. Third, it will illustrate the methods the Ministry of Propaganda used in following the principles of propaganda. Finally, it will provide an assessment of the impact of the propaganda in the development of Nazi Germany.

What is propaganda?

In discussing the role of propaganda in the Third Reich, it is important to determine what propaganda actually is. It is not a commandment to believe a certain fact, nor is it a reasoned discussion filled with tortuous logic.

It is neither blatant lies nor is it untarnished truth. Propaganda lies somewhere in the gray area of all these extremes. At best, it could be described as a heightened form of persuasion or a presentation designed to elicit a desirable conclusion from the audience. However, propaganda does contain certain prominent features. Though no one feature is sufficient to classify something as propaganda, each one is required in any reasonable definition -31-

w o r l d w a r II

Standard Candle

of the term. First, propaganda must appeal to a large audience. It must reach enough people to build up momentum and effect a large-scale change as a result. Second, propaganda targets the lowest common denominator of the intended population, both demographically and emotionally. Messages are presented in their simplest form in order to prompt the desired reaction.

Third is an element of repetition. This not only erodes any resistance or questioning to the accuracy of the message, but also helps elevate the message to the status of unquestioned maxim. Finally, propaganda must be believable. That is not to say that it is true or even ought to be believed, but propaganda must be acceptable to the belief system of the target audience.2

Anthony Pratkanis and Elliot Aronson – two professors of psychology at the University of California, Santa Cruz – clearly delineated four techniques that maximize the effects of propaganda. These maneuvers are: prepersuasion, source credibility, and message and emotions.3 Pre-persuasion involves structuring the debate and the social atmosphere so as to be conducive to one’s goals. It involves establishing the rules and pre-conceptions, whether stated or unstated, that dictate the terms of the issue. For example, envision the difference between a TV newscast opening with “Today we are discussing immigration”, or “Today we are discussing the problem of immigration.” Source credibility entails constructing a trustworthy image of the communicator. The third maneuver effectively distills to the concept of staying on message by either presenting the message in a way to prevent any distraction from it, or in a way that diminishes all distractions to where only the message is left. The final tactic of propaganda is to control the emotions of the target audience. By encouraging the audience either to reduce a negative emotion or to maintain or increase a positive emotion, the propagandist can provide a course of action that correlates with the desired outcome. In assessing the effectiveness of Nazi propaganda it will be helpful to keep these four criteria in mind as the principal metrics. Often the most successful campaigns involved an acute awareness of all four criteria not only by Hitler but also by his chief propagandist Joseph Goebbels.4 1

w o r l d w a r II

Who is Joseph Goebbels?

In hindsight, Joseph Goebbels is the perfect candidate for extremist causes. Born with a physical deformity of his foot, Goebbels felt like an outsider in most social circles. He attempted to become a fiction writer, but his first novel Michael: A German Fate was an utter failure.5 By 1925 he had become the secretary of the National Socialist Working Association in -32-

Morristown-Beard School

the northern and western parts of Germany, one of the multitudes of Nazi factions that emerged following the failure of the Beer Hall Putsch and the subsequent imprisonment of Adolf Hitler.6 Goebbels and Hitler differed so much that Goebbels even called for the expulsion of Hitler from the National Socialist Party. By mid 1926, however, Goebbels had made an about-face in his perception of Hitler and had become a fervent, perhaps excessive, admirer of Hitler.7 Goebbels became so mesmerized by Hitler that he wrote in his journal entries such as, “How I love him! What a man!” and “I want Hitler to be my friend. His photograph is on my desk. I could not bear it if I had to despair of this man.”8 At the same time however, Hitler recognized the intelligence and capability of Goebbels and increasingly placed Goebbels under his wing both within the political party structure and within the craft of propaganda. From 1925 onward Nazi Party leadership was unquestionably in the hands of Adolf Hitler, who would, with the aid of Joseph Goebbels, construct a mythos around Hitler to elevate him to the chancellorship of Germany.9

Hitler and Goebbels both worked tirelessly to construct an image of Hitler as a messianic figure coming forth to resurrect Germany. By 1926, the obligatory “Heil Hitler” had become standard party practice.10 On Hitler’s fortieth birthday, Goebbels had taken an ad out in the Nazi Party paper saying, “Fate has chosen [Adolf Hitler] to show the way to the German people.

Therefore we greet him in devotion and reverence, and can only wish that he may be preserved for us until his work is completed.”11 Together, Hitler and Goebbels would use the mythology of Hitler to sway massive crowds.

Goebbels would even engage in speaking tours with Adolf Hitler and Hermann Goering, having spent his formative days perfecting his speaking technique. He even went so far as to buy a three-sided mirror so that he could pose in front of it for hours to script every movement and analyze the impact of the performed gesture.12 As a speaker, Goebbels was known as a theatrical and charismatic spectacle, whose every movement and gesture was infused with meaning. At one point Hitler declared Goebbels the only man he could listen to without falling asleep, and described Goebbels’ audiences as “a witches’ cauldron of excitement.”13 By 1929, Joseph Goebbels soon held the office of Reichspropagandaleiter.14 When, in 1933, Hitler became the elected chancellor of Germany, he appointed Goebbels Minister of Propaganda and Public Enlightenment, both as reward for his instrumental role in the Nazi Party’s success and as a guarantee for the party’s future growth. It is no surprise, then, that Goebbels has gone down in the records as the mouthpiece of the Nazi propaganda regime.15 -33-

w o r l d w a r II

Standard Candle

w o r l d w a r II

Birth of the Third Reich

In 1923 Hitler was rotting in a prison as a conspirator in a failed coup d’etat.16 The National Socialist Party had splintered into various factions and had a treacherous image. Ten years later no other party was as well coordinated or growing as quickly, and a former prisoner was now chancellor of Germany. Such a radical turnaround did not occur accidentally. Instead, it was the byproduct of a systematic campaign of propaganda. The meteoric rise of Adolf Hitler developed from a cultivated exploitation of charismatic speaking techniques, a cult development strategy, and the willingness of the German people to construct a personality cult.17

If reaching a large audience is one criterion of propaganda, then Hitler and Goebbels followed it to the letter by making their speaking engagements a form of mass entertainment. Most of the events were pre-planned to the extent that a sense of pageantry could be displayed. As a Catholic, Goebbels was inspired by the spectacle of the church ceremony.18 In all cases speakers were placed on a high platform with little to no adornment around it, other than a large, looming, pristine representation of the swastika. With the stage set and the audience enthralled simply by the presentation, the Nazi Party could literally put forth an army of speakers before spectators. Under the head office for Speakers’ Affairs, party spokesmen were carefully organized into the low-level constituency speakers, district speakers, regional speakers, theme specific speakers, and the Reichsredner – “Reich’s Speakers.” The Reichsredner were promoted as pop stars and paid a commensurate salary.19 Of course few of these professional orators could match the panache of the Fuhrer himself. One spectator described a Hitler speech accordingly: “Hitler began in low key, quiet, almost diffidently, as if he were candidly presenting his anxieties about the future. Gradually the appearance of shyness gave way to tones of urgency, which swept his audience… now an almost tangible wave of enthusiasm was born among the hearers. In such an atmosphere, skepticism died, an opponent would have sounded like a temperance campaign appealing for sobriety at a Bacchanalian orgy.”20 In this light, the inspiration of Goebbels is understandable. A Nazi Party speech would have the same atmosphere as the riotous jubilation of a Sunday morning Baptist service.

Once drawn into the party ranks by charismatic speeches, a Nazi party member would be made to feel exceptional and privileged. Professors Pratkanis and Aronson define this tactic as the granfalloon technique. Granfalloons¬ – proud and meaningless associations of human beings – encourage -34-

Morristown-Beard School

people to accept strangers as close kin. As a corollary to the social status of those included in a selective group of granfalloons, anyone who lies outside that group is either ostracized or dehumanized. Obviously, the Nazi regime was known for its dehumanization of particular social groups, especially the gypsies and Jews. Yet, the Nazi system of scape-goating was more subtle than simple blanket attacks on ethnic groups; Nazis would tailor their message depending on their audience. For lower class groups Nazis railed against capitalism and vowed to protect workers from “International Finance.”21 For middle class groups, Nazis championed private property and warned of the looming specter of communism.22 For small business owners, they would attack large department stores as being an evil branch of a larger conspiracy.23

However, once outsider groups were targeted, party officials would actively try to encourage the unity of the Nazi Party either by appealing to the principles of the family or to the principle of the Volksgemeinschaft (national community).24 The sense of community had to percolate down to the level of individual Nazi recruits. Early adherents were often asked to show their loyalty to the Nazi Party by donning a brown shirt. Early German reaction was ridicule for these brown shirts, which in turn would cause members to turn inward to the party for support. Eventually, this tactic of rabid inclusion would escalate in the philosophy of genetic exceptionalism and Aryan superiority.

The larger success of the propaganda campaign was its sheer volume and intensity. Potential audiences were often inundated by the wide spread speculation of the Nazi Party’s newspaper. The Volkisscher Beobachter, with such headlines as, “Grandiose Progress of the Hitler days” or “A Mighty Show of Confidence in National Socialism on the Part of Lower Bavarian Peasant”, increased its circulation by over 400% between 1929 and 1932. When Hitler and the Nazi Party engaged in speaking tours, the people would already admire the Nazi leader and be familiar with Nazi doctrine. Hitler and his contingent of speakers would be sure to not disappoint the awaiting audience. In the early stages of the Nazi Party’s rise to prominence, a predisposed district could expect anywhere from 70 – 200 rallies crammed into two weeks.25 With such saturation the Nazi message was translated into political power. In 1930, the Nazi Party won 107 seats in the Reichstag, a startling increase from its 12 seats two years earlier and enough to make the Nazi Party the second largest in Germany. All this energy culminated in what has been described as the “great propaganda journey of the Fuhrer.”26 In the 1932 presidential election, Hitler himself spoke in 148 mass rallies, often three times a day and before crowds of 30,000 Germans. The driven and consistent rheto-35-

w o r l d w a r II

Standard Candle

ric of the Nazi Party propelled Hitler to the chancellorship by 1933. With a near majority, within five weeks of taking the oath of office, Hitler and the Nazi Party had won 288 seats. In ten years Hitler was able to progress from convict to chancellor because of a concentrated propaganda campaign.

w o r l d w a r II

Assessment of Early Nazi Propaganda Techniques

In assessing the success of the Nazi campaign, it first must be compared with the criteria of propaganda. The campaign obviously reached a fairly large audience of millions of Germans. In its use of the granfalloon technique, it was able to appeal to the least common denominator of the population and play off the simple fears and pride of the audience. With a party newspaper, the party could repeat slogans and skew facts regularly. If election records are any indicator, because of its saturation and ability to intensify popular prejudices, the Nazi message was believable to the majority of Germans. Clearly, the Nazi campaign was a propaganda campaign. By that standard, Hitler’s election as chancellor was one of the most successful and carefully orchestrated propaganda campaigns in history.

The success of the Nazi propaganda campaign can be more clearly understood in the light of the four techniques of persuasion. First, prepersuasion was a key feature of Nazi politics. Rarely would a Nazi speaking engagement occur without some sort of pamphleteering beforehand. Second, source credibility was carefully cultivated. No one would believe the message of a convict; however, bestowing and encouraging the messianic mythology of Hitler established credibility and fear in the public’s eye. In short, Nazis manufactured their own credibility. Third, the Nazis were obviously capable of maintaining a message in a wide variety of venues and adjusting to a wide variety of audiences. The militaristic division of the Nazi Party’s cadre of speakers ensured that no one member could deviate from party doctrine. Fourth, the lifeblood of the Nazi Party was the element of repetition. The chief architect of Nazi propaganda, Joseph Goebbels, once stated, “If you repeat a lie often enough, it becomes the truth.”27 The Nazi campaign matched up flawlessly with the necessary elements of successful propaganda. Due to the work of Joseph Goebbels, the Nazi propaganda is remembered as one of, if not the most, effective propaganda campaigns ever.

Conclusion

There are discernible characteristics that distinguish propaganda from mere information, and in a sense these characteristics boil down to -36-

Morristown-Beard School

packaging and proliferation. Having a hint of believability for even the most obtuse audiences constitutes the packaging while wide-scale repetition constitutes the proliferation. Master propagandists have learned to exploit discreet techniques – pre-disposed audiences to the message, buttressing the credibility of the source, discouraging deviation from the message and utilizing emotion to short circuit logic – to maximize the effects of propaganda. Joseph Goebbels was such a master propagandist, a fact not lost on a Hitler vying for unilateral control over Germany. In fact, Hitler’s recognition of Goebbels allowed the two men to transition from early antagonism toward each other, to mutual admiration. Once this partnership was forged, a fringe political party such as the Nazis was able to sustain a focused campaign on the insecurities of its own members and the biases of the German people. New supporters were garnered through spectacle and pageantry, while existing members were cemented in the party through cult-like tactics.

Hitler was and is the epitome of the dangers of concentrated power in a demagogue. Yet accomplishing this required the management of a division of pseudo-soldiers whose battlefield was the hearts and minds of the German people. Though Hitler’s campaign demanded the right set of circumstances at exactly the right period of time, it was his adeptly managed propaganda trail that led to his success. Even if Hitler had done nothing with his chancellorship and eventual dictatorship, his rhetorical assault should cause any citizen of a free-standing democracy to be wary. The basic right to the freedom of speech necessitates an even more fundamental responsibility for vigilance against manipulation.

It is not the rocks that destroy the ship of state, but rather the sirens’ call.

1 Randall Bytwerk. 2004. German Propaganda Archive. Available at http://www.calvin.edu/academic/cas/gpa/goeb41.htm. Last Accessed June 3rd 2008.

2 Elliot Aronson and Anthony Pratkanis. 2001. Age of Propaganda: The Everyday Use

and Abuse of Persuasion. New York: Henry Holt and Company.

3 Aronson and Pratkanis, Age of Propaganda.

4 Toby Clark. 1997. Art and Propaganda In The Twentieth Century: The Political Image

In the Age of Mass Culture. New York: Harry Abrams.

5 Ian Kershaw. 1990. The ‘Hitler Myth’: Image and Reality In the Third Reich.

New York: Oxford University Press.

6 Jackson J. Speilvogel. 2001. Hitler and Nazi Germany: A History. Upper Saddle River,

NJ: East End Publishing Services.

7 Kershaw, The ‘Hitler Myth’: Image and Reality.

8 Louis L. Snyder. 1989. Hitler’s Elite: Biographical Sketches of Nazis Who Shaped the

Third Reich. New York: Hippocrene Books 9 Spielvogel, Hitler and Nazi Germany.

10 Kershaw, The ‘Hitler Myth’.

11 Joshua Hagend. 2008. Parades, Public Space, and Propaganda: The Nazi Culture Parades

In Munich. Human Geography 90 (4): 349- 367.

-37-

w o r l d w a r II

Standard Candle

w o r l d

12 Ward Rutherford. 1985. Hitler’s Propaganda Machine. London: Bison Books 13 Rutherford, Hitler’s Propaganda Machine,.p. 45.

14 Bernard Mees. 2004. Hitler and Germanentum. Journal of Contemporary History

39(2): 255-270.

15 Kershaw, The ‘Hitler Myth’.

16 Z.A.B. Zeman. 1964. Untitled. Nazi Propaganda: World Affairs 127(3): 206-207 17 Snyder, Hitler’s Elite.

18 Rutherford, Hitler’s Propaganda Machine.

19 Rutherford, Hitler’s Propaganda Machine.

20 Kershaw, The ‘Hitler Myth’: p.52.

21 Spielvogel, Hitler and Nazi Germany: p. 59.

22 Kershaw, The ‘Hitler Myth’.

23 Spielvogel, Hitler and Nazi Germany.

24 Spielvogel, Hitler and Nazi Germany.

25 Linda M. Yelland. 1996. Belief in The Holocaust: Effects of Personality and Propaganda.

Political Psychology 17(3): 551- 562.

26 Kershaw, The ‘Hitler Myth’: p.41.

27 Spielvogel, Hitler and Nazi Germany: p.57.

w a r II

-38-

Morristown-Beard School

Peter Smith, ‘16

Submitted By Chris Teasdale.

The Division of Post War Europe From the late 1940s to the early 1990s much of Eastern Europe was controlled by the Soviet Union or its puppet states. These countries became known as the Eastern Bloc, and they were militarily bound together by the 1955 Warsaw Pact. East and west faced off in the Cold War until the fall of Communism in the late 1980s and early 1990s. But these eastern European nations were not always behind the Iron Curtain. Their fate was decided many years before during three strategic conferences among the leaders of the United States, the United Kingdom and the Soviet Union during World War II. These conferences were held in Tehran, Yalta and Potsdam, in 1943, 1944 and 1945. While the purpose of the conferences was to establish a military strategy to defeat Germany and its allies in the Second World War, they came to determine the fate of all of Europe for decades to come. The decisions made

by Joseph Stalin and the other Allied leaders during and soon after the end of World War II have had lasting effects on much of Eastern and Central Europe.

The first of these history-making conferences took place in Tehran, Iran, in 1943. The three main attendees, or the “Big Three”, were the Prime Minister of the United Kingdom, Winston Churchill, the President of the United States, Franklin Delano Roosevelt, and Joseph Stalin, the effective dictator of the Soviet Union. During the Tehran conference the outcome of the war was still uncertain, and the conversation was dominated by talk of the proposed invasion of France and the formation of the United Nations. However, at Yalta in late 1944, as victory in Europe became inevitable, the three powers began discussing the fate of post-war Germany.

The leaders decided to make the unconditional surrender of Germany the top priority, without a compromised peace. The post-war government of Germany was discussed in detail. Both Germany and its capital city, Berlin, would be divided into four occupation zones. Each zone was to be governed by a different Allied power that had taken part in the war against Germany, and a committee would be created to determine how Germany would be divided. As the Soviet and Western troops closed in on Berlin even the Germans began to realize defeat was inevitable.

As the Allies came ever closer, the race was on to be the first to reach Berlin, at least in Stalin’s mind. During the Yalta conference, Roosevelt men-39-

w o r l d w a r II

Standard Candle

w o r l d w a r II

tioned to Stalin that the United States was working on an extremely powerful new bomb. It was also known that the Germans were working on developing a similar weapon. Stalin wanted to get to Berlin as fast as possible to seize research from the German science labs before American or British forces could.

So from mid-1944 to early 1945, the Soviets pushed hard through much of Eastern Europe and Germany. Then, finally, in late April 1945, Soviet troops entered the outskirts of Berlin and eventually the capital itself. On May 2, 1945, the defenders of Berlin surrendered and on May 8 the whole of the German army surrendered.

Soon afterwards, from July 16 to August 2, 1945, the final crucial conference of the war was held by the three great powers, in Potsdam, Germany. In the eight months since the last meeting in Yalta, the leadership had changed in both of the United States and Britain. President Roosevelt had died on April 12, meaning that Vice President Harry S. Truman had assumed office. And in Britain an election had been held on July 5. During the Potsdam conference the results of the election came in and Winston Churchill was replaced

by Clement Attlee. At the conference, all of the leaders in attendance came to a final agreement on the occupation of Germany and Berlin, agreed on the prosecution of Nazi war criminals, and reached agreement over German postwar policies, including demilitarization, denazification and democratization.

Under the original plan initially agreed upon at Yalta in 1944, both Germany and Berlin would be divided into four occupation zones.

The western half of each would be occupied by one of the three Western Allies -- the United States, Great Britain and France -- and the eastern portion would be under the administration of the Soviet Union. The country would be under the overall authority of the Allied Control Council. But tensions between the Soviet Union and the Western Allies soon grew and in June 1945 Stalin told German Communist leaders that he would undermine the British occupation and that the Americans would withdraw within two years, enabling Stalin to unite Germany as one Communist state.

Then on June 28, 1948, the Soviet Union began an almost 11-month-long blockade of Western-occupied Berlin. During the blockade, all road and rail access by the Western Allies to Berlin, 200 miles within the Soviet occupation zone, was blocked by the Soviets. In order to combat this, the Western Allies established an airlift system to bring necessary supplies into West Berlin. For almost a year, American and British airlifts delivered supplies that would have otherwise been unavailable to Berlin.

The airlifts were so effective that on May 12, 1949 the Soviet blockade of -40-

Morristown-Beard School

West Berlin was lifted. The blockade marked the end of a stable political relationship between the Western Allies and the Soviet Union in Germany.

Shortly after the blockade was lifted in May 1949, the Westernoccupied zones of Germany combined to form the Federal Republic of Germany, or West Germany; and later that year, on October 7, 1949, the Soviet-occupied zone became the German Democratic Republic, or East Germany. The city of Berlin remained divided between the two new countries.

In the years after the end of the war, the Soviet Union created other puppet states out of the countries it had “liberated” from the Axis in Eastern Europe. These countries included Albania, Bulgaria, Czechoslovakia, East Germany, Hungary, Poland, Romania and Yugoslavia, all of which remained Communist through the 1980s; and with the exception of Albania and Yugoslavia, all remained loyal to the Soviets until the fall of Communism in Europe. The three Baltic States, Latvia, Lithuania and Estonia, lost their semi-independence and were incorporated into the Soviet Union itself.

Both the Western Allies and the Soviets kept a strong military presence in Europe, especially the two Germanys, and even increased their troop strength over time. The Soviets dramatically ramped up their military presence in the whole of Eastern Europe over the next decades. And with construction of the Berlin Wall starting in 1961, it seemed that the East would be forever sealed off from the West.

Through the 1960s, 70s, and 80s, the race for military and political dominance grew ever more intense, until in the late 1980s a wave of democratic revolutions swept over Eastern Europe. Beginning in Czechoslovakia and Hungary in 1989, a revolutionary attitude soon spread to East Germany and even the Soviet Union. After months of unrest across Europe, in November 1989, the Berlin Wall fell and the East German government finally began to allow the free movement of its citizens between East and West Germany. Over the next year, the process of integration between the two countries began, and on October 3, 1990, East Germany was officially reunited with West Germany.

After years of decentralization of power, civil unrest in the early 1990s, and an attempted coup d’état in August 1991, the Soviet Union officially dissolved on December 25, 1991. This resulted in the independence of the various Soviet republics and at least some form of nonCommunist leadership in all of the republics. The only republic where the Communist Party was able to stay in power after the Soviet Union fell apart was Moldova, but in the 2009 election they too were defeated.

The collapse of the Soviet Union and its Communist puppet gov-41-

w o r l d w a r II

Standard Candle

ernments throughout Eastern Europe represented the end of the world order that resulted from the three great conferences between Stalin and the other Allied leaders during the last years of World War II. But the effects of decades of division will probably be felt for many more years to come.

Bibliography

w o r l d w a r II

1 Axelrod, Alan. “Invasion of the Soviet Union during World War II.” Encyclopedia of World War II, Volume II. New York: Facts On File, Inc., 2007. Modern World History Online.

Facts On File, Inc. http://www.fofweb.com/activelink2.asp?

2 Axelrod, Alan, and Charles Phillips. “Stalin, Joseph.” Dictators & Tyrants: Absolute Rulers and Would-Be Rulers in World History. New York: Facts On File, Inc., 1995. Modern World History Online. Facts On File, Inc. http://www.fofweb.com/activelink2.asp?

3 “BBC News - Moldova Communists Lose Majority.” BBC News. 30 July 2009. Web. 4 Jan. 2012. <http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/8173649.stm>.

4 “Berlin Blockade.” Wikipedia, the Free Encyclopedia. Web. 12 Jan. 2012. <http:// en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Berlin_Blockade>.

5 Biesinger, Joseph A. “Berlin Blockade.” Germany: A Reference Guide from the Renaissance to the Present, European Nations. New York: Facts On File, Inc., 2006. Modern World History Online. Facts On File, Inc. http://www.fofweb.com/activelink2.asp?

6 Biesinger, Joseph A. “Battle for Berlin.” Germany: A Reference Guide from the Renaissance to the Present, European Nations. New York: Facts On File, Inc., 2006. Modern World History Online. Facts On File, Inc. http://www.fofweb.com/activelink2.asp?

7 Biesinger, Joseph A. “The Federal Republic of Germany.” Germany: A Reference Guide from the Renaissance to the Present, European Nations. New York: Facts On File, Inc., 2006.

Modern World History Online. Facts On File, Inc. http://www.fofweb.com/activelink2.asp?

8 Borrero, Mauricio. “Nazi-Soviet nonaggression pact.” Russia: A Reference Guide from the Renaissance to the Present, European Nations. New York: Facts On File, Inc., 2004. Modern World History Online. Facts On File, Inc. http://www.fofweb.com/activelink2.asp?

9 Carlisle, Rodney P. “’Big Three’ meetings.” Encyclopedia of the Atomic Age. New York: Facts On File, Inc., 2001. Modern World History Online. Facts On File, Inc. http://www. fofweb.com/activelink2.asp?

10 Hutchinson, Daniel. “Battle of Stalingrad.” In Ackermann, Marsha E., Michael Schroeder, Janice J. Terry, Jiu-Hwa Lo Upshur, and Mark F. Whitters, eds. Encyclopedia of World History: Crisis and Achievement, 1900 to 1950, vol. 5. New York: Facts On File, Inc., 2008.

Modern World History Online. Facts On File, Inc. http://www.fofweb.com/activelink2.asp?

11 Jenkins, Roy. “Victory in Europe and Defeat in Britain.” Churchill: A Biography. New York: Farrar, Straus and Giroux, 2001. 778-79. Print.

12 Phillips, Charles, and Alan Axelrod. “World War II on the Russian Front.” Encyclopedia of Wars, vol. 3. New York: Facts On File, Inc., 2005. Modern World History Online. Facts On File, Inc. http://www.fofweb.com/activelink2.asp?

-42-

Morristown-Beard School

Brette Brier, â&#x20AC;&#x2DC;13

Submitted By Richard Timek

a r c h i t e c t u r e -43-

Standard Candle

Ashley Young, ‘14

Submitted By Samara Landers, Ph.D.

A Wife’s Confinement

j a n e e y r e

T

hroughout literature, as well as history, female characters have faced the oppressive presence of male figures. Women are often imprisoned, whether it is a literal confinement or not. Prison and similar confinement is a common motif in Charlotte Bronte’s Jane Eyre. Told through the perspective of the eponymous female protagonist, Jane Eyre depicts in particular the imprisonment that comes with marriage. On Jane’s wedding day, secrets are revealed, and she discovers her fiancé has kept his previous wife, the insane Bertha Mason, locked in his attic. Bertha Mason is not only the most obvious example of confinement in the novel, but she also embodies Jane’s fears of being a wife: a symbol of the restricted role wives had during this time.

While Jane never states her apprehension outright, she shows several times before her wedding that she is hesitant and fearful. The first time Mr. Rochester addresses her as his future wife, her reaction is not one of pure happiness or excitement: “The feeling, the announcement sent through me…it was, I think, almost fear,” (298). There is no doubt that Jane loves Mr. Rochester, but it is also clear that she is overwhelmed and scared by the prospect of becoming his wife. Though Jane does not explain the reason for her fear explicitly, one can pick up hints of her fears throughout the pre-wedding period. “I half lost the sense of power over him. I was about mechanically to obey him, without further remonstrance,” she says (306). In this instance, the reader can see that Jane is not comfortable playing a subordinate role to Rochester, complying to his every request as a wife might be expected to do.

The idea that Jane does not wish to be a typical wife to a dominant husband appears again when Jane refuses to buy lavish dresses and accept Rochester’s ornate gifts. With the memory of the prison she called Gateshead still vivid in her mind, Jane not only resents, but also fears the idea of being imprisoned.

Jane comes face-to-face with her fears in the form of Bertha Mason.

She represents the result of marriage, or at least the result Jane fears: being literally imprisoned by her husband. Bertha is the living embodiment of Jane’s inner feelings and fears. When Jane becomes fearful as the wedding approaches, she does not display her emotions, other than expressing ominous nightmares.

But in the same time frame, Bertha finds her way inside of Jane’s room and rips her wedding veil in half. And Bertha, even if not intentionally, is the one who -44-

Morristown-Beard School

ultimately prevents Jane’s marriage. It is as if Bertha is Jane’s subconscious, acting out her thoughts. In this role, Bertha also projects what Jane’s future could be in marrying Rochester: she has been driven to insanity and is confined to a lonesome attic, unable to do anything without her husband’s consent.

This speaks to the role that wives played during the time of the novel’s creation, being imprisoned, in a way, being a common fate to married women. Vying for someone to treat her as an equal and to be free, the opposite of all she has had throughout her life, Jane is extremely fearful of all that Bertha represents. Even before Bertha physically exists in Jane’s world, she is present in the back of Jane’s mind, warning her against the imprisonment of marriage.

j a n e e y r e

-45-

Standard Candle

Zoe Steinberg, ‘14

Submitted By Darren Lovelock.

Steps to Marriage

j a n e e y r e

I

n her novel Jane Eyre, Charlotte Brontë allows Jane to fall in love with her master, Mr. Rochester. Even though these feelings of love and passion persist, Jane does not believe anything will ever come of her growing crush, since not only is it rare for a man to wed his inferior, but Rochester appears to be courting another woman as well. At first glance, it would appear to the reader that this woman, Blanche Ingram, is a much more suitable match for Rochester than Jane; she is wealthy, beautiful, and sophisticated, whereas Jane has no money but that which Rochester pays her, is plain, and is in Rochester’s employ as a governess. Due to these traits, it seems only natural that Rochester would choose Blanche Ingram over Jane as his bride without a second thought. However, despite the seemingly inevitable union between Rochester and Ingram, Rochester has been growing closer to Jane. It is because of this growing relationship that the reader is initially uncertain of Rochester’s genuine feelings towards either of these women. Although Brontë does not give the reader direct insight into Rochester’s true emotions, the reader is soon left in no doubt that Rochester and Jane are a good match. Bronte subtly conveys the growing bond between him and Jane through his actions and their dialogue, and she stresses the appropriateness of their union through contrast with their other, less successful, relationships.

Dialogue between Jane and Rochester is an important tool to allow the reader to see their growing relationship. When they first meet, Rochester is cold and unfriendly towards Jane. He tries to be civil, but is easily irritated and complains: “Confound these civilities! I continuously forget them” (296). He even goes so far as to insult Jane, after she called him ugly, and tells her that she is, “Not pretty anymore than I am handsome” (301). Many women, including Ingram, would not stand for such an insult, but Jane not only does not mind it, she actually says, “I like rudeness a great deal better than flattery” (577). The unusual frankness preferred by both parties is a hint provided by Brontë that the two are similar, and the freedom with which they talk to each other makes their bond more intimate than one centered on formalities and shallow complements. Although it is not standard behavior for couples during this time period to speak with such sincere frankness, neither Rochester nor Jane has a tendency to obey ordinary social customs -46-

Morristown-Beard School

anyway. Jane began standing up to her adult aunt at age ten, and now speaks openly and honestly with the man who employs and pays her; Rochester is a gentleman who dislikes children, yet he despises standard niceties and adopted his ex-lover’s illegitimate child from another man, keeping her at his manor rather than sending her off to school. These are just a few examples of ways the two stray from the standard social conventions of their time.

The fact that Rochester and Jane are a good match for each other is actually ironic. They both have trouble following the standard social customs of their society, yet it is because of this trouble that they fell in love with each other.

Brontë also shows the subtle yet passionate bond between Rochester and Jane by consistently allowing Rochester to reveal the irrepressibility of his feelings for Jane. The most obvious example is immediately after Jane saves Rochester from the fire. Anyone would be grateful to his or her savior, but Rochester takes this gratitude a step further by telling Jane that he has, “ A pleasure in owing you so immense a debt” (340). Jane describes Rochester as having a “headstrong” (350) and “stubborn” (589) nature on multiple occasions. A man with that quality of independence would inevitably find it very hard to take pleasure in owing his life to another. This reveals that Rochester’s affection for Jane has grown since they first met, when Rochester did not even thank Jane for helping him back onto his horse after he fell, let alone take pleasure in owing her for it. He even calls her, “Cherished” (341), as he tries to say goodnight. Rochester is a man who continuously refers to his adopted daughter as a, “Brat” (295, 584); it is against his personality to be kind to anyone, especially not someone particularly close to him. The fact that he is happy to be so with Jane signals a large advancement in their relationship. A second example of Brontë revealing Rochester’s feelings for Jane is when Jane decides to leave the drawing room early the first nights the lords and ladies are visiting Thornfield Hall. Rochester follows her out, and as she is leaving, he starts to tell Jane, “Goodnight, my-“ (404). After this, he immediately bites his tongue and walks away. It would seem that Rochester made this abrupt exit because he was about to say something he wanted to, but for some reason could not or was embarrassed to. Give that Rochester refers to Jane as, “My darling” (565) after his accepted proposal, the reader can infer that he wanted to, and was on the cusp of calling a girl who at the time was simply his governess, “darling”, or possibly even “love”. This pause indicates that Rochester’s feelings for Jane are similar to her own for him, which the reader knows because Brontë shares them. It is Rochester’s feelings that the reader is uncertain of, but Brontë’s use of pauses and similar tone -47-

j a n e e y r e

Standard Candle

j a n e e y r e

between Jane and Rochester allow one to see the growth and progression from Jane and Rochester’s meeting into a passionate, intimate relationship.

Finally, Brontë proves to the reader that the bond between Rochester and Jane is passionate enough that they should be together by contrasting their relationship together with their relationships with other characters.

When St. John asks Jane to marry him, she tells him that she loves him, “As a sister” (900). Jane had come to regard St. John as a brother, and was not interested in the prospect of a romantic relationship with him. She even goes so far as to tell him, “If I were to marry you, you would kill me” (897).

Jane admits that she would end up working herself to the bone until she could not stand, with no love in return, simply because she is too afraid to let St. John down. The relationship ends coldly and dispassionately, which is the exact opposite of how Jane left Rochester. Rochester calls Jane, “passionate” (652); an emotionless, unloving marriage would have caused her more misery than spending the rest of her life alone. When Jane goes back to Rochester, she tells him that St. John, “Does not love me” (963) and that she is not, “Happy at his side, nor near him, nor with him” (964). The relationship would never have worked; St. John simply wanted Jane as an assistant, and marriage was the only practical way of achieving that. This reasoning is also what led to the unsuccessful relationship between Rochester and Blanche Ingram. Rochester is a passionate man, willing to marry his governess because of the strength of his love for her; he would not settle for another simply because of her class. Brontë showed that Rochester and Jane belong together by making Rochester’s distaste at marrying a woman he did not love obvious to the reader. By negatively contrasting Jane and Rochester’s relationship with two other relationships--Jane and the dispassionate St. John and Rochester and the vain Blanche Ingram--Brontë proves to the reader that there is a bond between Rochester and Jane that nothing can break.

Although the reader has no direct insight into Rochester’s emotions, one can see the intimate growth of the relationship between him and Jane through their actions together and in contrast with those in their other relationships. At first, the reader is somewhat surprised and indignant on Jane’s behalf by Rochester’s brutal honesty about her appearance. Then, when it becomes apparent that Jane prefers this frankness to shallow flattery, the reader grows more comfortable with this direct manner of conversation. The couple’s willingness to speak openly with each other is how Brontë conveys the first steps in the growing relationship. Then, on two occasions when Rochester is forced to part with Jane, his emotions run high, and he even -48-

Morristown-Beard School

comes to the verge of calling her, “darling.” This shows that the bond the two share has become more intimate and involves romantic interest from both parties. Finally, by contrasting Jane’s happiness during the attempted marriage with Rochester, even though it failed, with her disappointment and sadness in the possible marriage with St. John, Brontë shows the reader that Rochester is truly the best possible match for Jane. The joy felt by both Jane and Rochester when they are finally married is satisfying to the reader, because the reader can see that the marriage does not depend on status or desire for a new wife, but because Jane and Rochester are truly in love.

j a n e e y r e

-49-

Standard Candle

JD Parker, â&#x20AC;&#x2DC;15

Submitted By Mark Hartman

a r t s y

-50-

Morristown-Beard School

Sumiran Sapru, ‘13

Submitted By Patrick Horan, Ph.D.

Freedom and Suppression

I

n literature certain objects or places serve to accentuate an important concept or idea that the author is trying to convey. These symbols often add another layer of depth to the plot of a novel. Such symbols are present in the novel The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn by Mark Twain and the short story “Bartleby” by Herman Melville, in the form of a river and a wall respectively. The river, free-flowing and constant, represents freedom and escape, while the wall, immovable and absolute, symbolizes suppression and isolation.

The river serves as a place of paradise away from civilization and allows Huck to experience absolute freedom of thought and action. Meanwhile, the wall is binding and repressive for Bartleby, leaving him in a state of impassivity.

The free-flowing Mississippi River represents liberation and relaxation from the pressures of society and life. On the river Huck and Jim are free to think and act as they wish without worrying about someone trying to suppress them. This is evident when Twain writes, “It was kind of solemn, drifting down the big still river, laying on our backs looking up at the stars and we didn’t ever feel like talking loud... and nothing ever happened to us all, that night, nor the next, nor the next” (75). The river is unbinding and relieves tension, allowing for those on it to think and act as they wish. Jim and Huck are left alone from interruptions by society, thus allowing them to interact with one another without bias and misconceptions. This would not be possible in the enclosed and suppressive “civilized” world they live in. The river also accentuates the idea of free thought as well, since it is where Huck dwells on issues of morality and matures.

Additionally, the river also symbolizes an escape from the harsh realities of the civilized world. Huck comments that, “We said there warn’t no home like a raft, after all. Other places do seem so cramped up and smothery, but a raft don’t. You feel mighty free and easy and comfortable on a raft” (134). The river serves as an outlet from the chaotic life that Huck leads before he goes out on the raft. On the river, Huck does not have to cope with the abuses of his father, or forced reformation at the hands of Mrs. Watson. Huck finds a paradise-like place on the river where he feels at ease and does not have to conform to the ways of others.

On the contrary, the wall in “Bartleby” is a symbol of suppression -51-

h u c k l e b e r r y F i n n

Standard Candle

h u c k l e b e r r y

and binds one in thought and action. Bartleby is isolated and bound to a miserable existence by the many walls that surround him. Bartleby’s office faces a wall that “might entirely isolate Bartleby from my sight, but not remove him from my voice” (101). This wall physically cuts Bartleby off from the outside world, allowing only “some light” (100) to enter. Metaphorically, this wall binds Bartleby to the darkness of loneliness and seals any interaction of any kind. Additionally, the “wall” has a suppressive effect on Bartleby’s thoughts.

He is often seen to be “looking, at his pale window, behind the screen, upon the dead brick wall” (112). The wall blocks all emotion and leaves Bartleby in a state of inactivity and listlessness. Bartleby yearns to be released, but the wall holds him like a prisoner. This prison of walls, isolate Bartleby and bind him to his sedentary life. Even in death, it is implied there is no escape when the narrator comments that, “Rather would I let him live here and die here and then mason up his remains in the wall?” (126). The binding attributes of the “wall” are in direct contrast with the free flowing Mississippi River.

The symbols of the “wall” and “the river” are polar opposites in their meaning and significance. The river represents freedom of thought and action while the wall acts as a depressant. Additionally, the river offers an escape route from societal pressures for Huck, while the wall holds Bartleby as a prisoner.

If Huck had been cutoff and isolated by a “wall”, he probably would not have matured and would eventually conform to society. In contrast, Bartleby, on the river, would have a chance to discover his personality and would be allowed to think and act freely. This swapping of symbols would lead to the character development of Bartleby but the regression of Huck. It is also important to note that the river, an object of nature, represents something positive while the wall, a man-made object, represents something negative. All in all, the two symbols offer important insight into the lives of the characters that they directly affect.

F i n n -52-

Morristown-Beard School

Daniel Collins, ‘13

Submitted By Patrick Horan, Ph.D.

Situation and Adaptation

I

n The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn, Huck’s personality and beliefs change depending on who he is with at the time. He reverses his opinion entirely on some issues, changing the way he faces familiar situations.

Though Huck at first objects to anyone trying to change him, he adapts and changes his behavior to match the expectations of those around him. How quickly he adapts often depends on how much he needs the person to like him.

When Huck is with the widow Douglass and Miss Watson, he is able to adhere to their rules and lifestyle, making himself acceptable to them.

When he first lives at their house, he complains about, “How decent and regular the widow was in all her ways” (13), and about how she kept trying to, “sivilise” him. These objections come from Huck as he was before being taken in by the widow, free-spirited, unconstrained, and uneducated. He objects to Miss Watson’s, “Deadly dull” (15) teaching, and cannot stay concentrated while working with her (15). This remains seemingly unchanged, and this attitude is echoed in his escapade with Tom, where they pretend to be a band of robbers (20), as well as skipping school, whenever he gets, “Uncommon tired” (27). However, only a few months later, Huck begins to appreciate school. In his words, “The longer I went to school, the easier it got to be” (27). At home, the widow’s “decent and regular” (13), behavior became less of an annoyance to him, and, though he did not like, “Living in a house, and sleeping in a bed” (27) as much as he did his old ways, he was able to change his behaviors to the point where the widow said he was, “doing very satisfactory” (27), as opposed to calling him a, “Poor lost lamb” (14) as she had earlier. Even Huck himself, whereas earlier he had hated everything about his new life, now “liked the new [ways], too” (27). In his adaptation to his new life, Huck manages not only to persuade others, but himself as well.

Although Huck behaves in a very different manner when he is with his father, he adheres to his expectations in much the same way that he did with the widow. In the beginning, before being taken away, Huck objects to his father’s intrusions into his life. Pap objects to Huck’s, “Highfalut’n foolishness” (31) of reading and writing in much the same way that Huck did at first.

However, instead of accepting a return to his old ways, Huck objects, “To spite pap” (36), and to prevent Pap from changing his life. Once Huck is taken to -53-

h u c k l e b e r r y F i n n

Standard Candle

h u c k l e b e r r y F i n n

the woods with Pap though, it was not long until he “was used to being where [he] was, and liked it” (36). Even though he was whipped and beaten, he enjoyed the laid- back lifestyle of “smoking and fishing, and no books nor study” (36). A few months later, after living this way for a while, he had completely assimilated, and he, “Didn’t see how [he] had ever got to like it so well at the widow’s.” (37). This change occurs much faster than his change while he was with the widow. With the widow, it took him a long time to change his personality; with Pap though, he changes almost immediately. It is much more urgent to adapt to Pap as opposed to Miss Watson. Whereas the worst Miss Watson will do is, “Give (him) a good going over”(23); when he misbehaves with Pap, Pap will “Get too handy with the hickory” (37). Here, Huck has to avoid physical harm, as opposed to avoiding a relatively harmless scolding.

This pattern, where Huck initially resists change but later adapts, is repeated when he travels with Jim, although this time the change occurs much more slowly. Originally, Huck ignores Jim’s warnings, and believes that all of his omens of bad luck are superstition. He picks up a snakeskin, even after Jim said that it was, “The worst bad luck in the world” (63). Similarly, Huck makes fun of Jim, especially how he thinks the food Huck brought was made by, “Witchcraft”(54), and that obscure things like “Count[ing] the things you cook for dinner” (56) can bring you bad luck. While living with Jim however, Huck’s notions begin to change, though this change is gradual and protracted. When Huck complains about having to climb up and down from the cave, Jim says that, “The little birds had said it was going to rain”(59), as justification. Sure enough, rain soon arrives, and their supplies are saved because of Jim’s superstition. Similarly, Huck later admits that bad luck came when he put a snakeskin by Jim’s blanket (63-64). This admission shows Huck’s acceptance of Jim’s superstition, and his gradual adaptation to Jim’s way of life. Such a change is hard for Huck though. Since he finds it difficult to, “humble himself to a n-”(94), he clearly has much less respect for Jim than he does for either Miss Watson or Pap. It is because of this that it takes so much longer for Huck to change himself for Jim, because he respects Jim so much less. He feels much less of a desire to change, without the scoldings from Miss Watson or beatings from Pap. Jim has no power over him.

Though Huck at first objects to others trying to change him, he eventually changes himself to become what the people he is with want him to be. By looking at the various actions Huck takes, this changing nature of his personality becomes clear. Whereas he acts one way with the widow, he may act completely differently while living with Pap or Jim. This change does not -54-

Morristown-Beard School

always occur at the same rate though. Huck changes much faster when he has greater incentive to do so. These changes allow him to get others to like him better, and in turn, treat him better. Most importantly, Huck changes because it allows him to make others treat him better than they would have otherwise.

h u c k l e b e r r y F i n n

-55-

Standard Candle

Tori Gonzalez, â&#x20AC;&#x2DC;13

Submitted By Richard Timek

a r c h i t e c t u r e -56-

Morristown-Beard School

Jacqueline McGinley, ‘12

Submitted By Rocio Romero

Perfección

Y

o recuerdo cuando era una bailarina increíble. Todos me miraban y les encantaba la pasión y emoción que mostraba cada vez que yo me ponía mis zapatillas de ballet. En este mundo, todos teníamos algunas cosas que nos hacían buenos y algunas cosas que nos hacían malos. Pero eso es parte del pasado. Ahora somos diferentes. Ahora, yo soy diferente.

Hoy, ha pasado un año exactamente desde que esta transformación ha ocurrido. El 15 de diciembre de 2073 fue un día emocionante y pionero.

Yo estaba en el coche yendo a la escuela cuando mi radio cambió a un anuncio especial. El doctor Smarty, un doctor muy conocido, estaba hablando sobre su nueva invención, la persona perfecta. “Nunca mas tiene que estudiar para un examen, y si no es bueno en los deportes, ahora si lo será! Con la instalación de una pastilla de silicio, su vida cambiará para siempre.” El explicó que era necesario que todo el mundo recibiera este tratamiento. No era una opción.

En ese momento me puse un poco nerviosa. Pensé, ¿por que no podríamos decidir si queríamos la pastilla de silicio o no? Por supuesto yo estaba entusiasmada, pero algo parecía muy raro. Antes de que yo tuviera más tiempo para pensar, llegué a la escuela y fui directamente a la clase. En el medio de la lección, unos hombres vestidos de negro entraron a la clase con unas agujas. Iban a meter la pastilla de silicio dentro de nuestras columnas vertebrales. Miedo entró en mi cuerpo, viajó por mis venas, y tembló en mi garganta. Traté de escapar, pero me agarraron, y dentro de unos segundos, fue demasiado tarde. La aguja rasgó mi piel y la pastilla de silicio fue instalada.

Después de ese momento, mi vida fue muy diferente. Empecé a tratar nuevas actividades, ¡y las hice perfectamente!. Sin esfuerzo, yo era una tremenda jugadora de basquetbol. Saqué cien en cada examen en la escuela, y nunca tenía que estudiar. Esos han sido los beneficios de todo esto. Nunca he tenido tensión porque todo viene naturalmente.

Yo estaba contenta con la pastilla de silicio hasta más tarde en la semana, cuando fui a mi clase de baile. La gente hacía fila fuera de la puerta del edificio. Todos querían bailar porque ahora, todos eran bailarines talentosos. Todos eran tan buenos como yo. Esto me hizo muy frustrada. ¿Para que había practicado todo este tiempo? Todo mi sacrificio, todo mi esfuerzo, y toda mi esperanza no habían valido nada. Yo -57-

m i s c e l l a n e o u s

Standard Candle

m i s c e l l a n e o u s

empezaba a ver el lado negativo de esta invención y la comencé a odiar.

Los equipos profesionales de deportes fueron desterrados porque ahora, todos pueden jugarlos. Ahora, no existe ninguna motivación porque todos somos naturalmente talentosos. Todos quieren conseguir un mejor trabajo ahora que pueden, y no queda nadie para hacer las demás cosas. Yo odio la pastilla de silicio. Se suponía que haría que todo fuera perfecto, pero ha hecho exactamente lo contrario. Es triste que nadie mas pueda destacarse por sus diferencias.

Necesitamos encontrar una solución para este problema. Necesitamos una cura inmediatamente. No puedo vivir mas de esta manera. Tal vez si nosotros tratáramos de hacer errores, ellos considerarían el final de la invención.

Hoy, todos somos iguales, todos somos perfectos. Nadie me mira bailar mas porque ellos pueden hacer las mismas cosas que yo. He pasado toda mi vida bailando. He practicado cada semana desde mi niñez.

He sacrificado mucho para continuar bailando, y ahora…. lo he perdido.

-58-

Morristown-Beard School

Eric Fernandez, ‘14

Submitted By Mike Kelly

Risking Failure

I

n the world today, failing carries a connotation of dishonor and tarnish.

There are a few optimists, such as the Mythbusters that follow the motto, “Failure is always an option,” and Mrs. Frizzle who says, “Take chances, make mistakes, get messy!” in every episode of The Magic School Bus. Steve from “After I Was Thrown into the River and Before I Drowned” by Dave Eggers is part of this exclusive group that believes taking chances and failing is better than not taking the risk at all. Steve is a dog that loves to run fast and take risks even while under the scrutiny of condescending squirrels.

He risks his life every day in agility races against other dogs. In “After I Was Thrown into the River and Before I Drowned,” the innocent and carefree nature of Steve the dog allows him to accept failure while his peers cannot.

Steve regularly escapes to the forest where he runs races with his fellow dogs. Included in the racecourse is a jump over a drainpipe. Some dogs in the past have gotten hurt or have even perished while jumping over this pipe.

Watching the jump is a group of squirrels that criticize the jumpers. They complain about how uncoordinated the jumps were and are happy to see someone fall. Steve says this of the squirrels: “They do not try to jump the gap. The running and jumping feels so good even when we don’t win or fall into the gap it feels so good”(3). The squirrels show how quick one is to criticize another’s actions even if they have not tried it themselves. They never will know how hard it is to jump over the pipe because they are not willing to try it themselves-and risk failure. Steve tells the reader it is not the outcome of the landing, but rather the thrill of flying through the air that makes jumping so much fun. In other words, life is about enjoying the journey, not the destination.

As Steve is racing a love interest named Susan, the jump takes a turn for the worse. Susan falls into the pipe, breaking her leg. The squirrels continue with their usual banter, and Franklin one of the dogs, reacts to the mockery in a peculiar way. Steve says, “He grabs one [squirrel] in his jaws and crushes all its bones. Their voices are always talking but we forget they are so small, their head and bones so tiny,”(5). By attacking the squirrels Franklin admits that falling into the pipe is a horrible failure. Eleanor Roosevelt once said, “No one can make you feel inferior without your consent,” and Franklin gives consent to squirrels’ opinion of failure, responding with -59-

m i s c e l l a n e o u s

Standard Candle

m i s c e l l a n e o u s

violence. Steve reacts in a different way by noticing how small and insignificant the squirrels are. He discredits their opinions, and continues to believe in jumping for the thrill, not the outcome. Unlike Steve, Susan takes the full force of the mockery. Steve says, “When she smiles she looks like she’s asking to die,”(5). Susan thinks that her failure in clearing the jump somehow brings her shame. It is because she believes failure is not an option.

After seeing his Susan miss her mark and fall into the pipe, the obstacle becomes tougher both figuratively and physically. To continue jumping over the pipe would seem insane to the dogs, knowing that one could easily get hurt. Steve also notices that the pipe has been expanded, widening the chance of failure. Steve says, “I want this so much, the floating”(5) as he chooses to try the jump. Steve longs to be floating, which carries a connotation of being free, especially careless of the landing. Unfortunately, Steve’s jump does not carry him to the other side of the pipe. He falls and dies. The squirrels follow with their harsh criticism of the jump, and Franklin reacts by killing a few of them. This shows that the squirrels and Franklin are both angry that Steve took the risk and failed. Steve, in a conscious dead state thinks, “I knew that some are wanting to run and some are afraid to run and maybe they are broken and are angry for it” (6). In these words, Steve questions why his peers are afraid to take risks. He reasons that the squirrels are so harsh, Franklin is so violent, and Susan is so sad because of their fear of failure and shame.

Steve’s ability to accept failure allows him to face utter calamity: his death.

In many people’s eyes failure to accomplish something brings dishonor and shame. Included in this group are the squirrels that criticize the hounds about their jumps but will never attempt to race themselves. Franklin also believes this, but he does not want to admit that the squirrels are right and hides his feelings in violence. Susan similarly accepts that she is a failure for her missed jump, and is full of shame because of it. Steve is the only character that believes that failure is not a shameful result. He knows that having fun, and taking chances will make him a better being. It is not about who wins, and who loses, but how you play the game.

-60-

Morristown-Beard School

Benjamin Leigh, ‘14

Submitted By Kelly Hunter

Geometric Constructions: The Art and Science of Creating Lengths, Angles, and Geometric Shapes

m he word geometry most nearly translates to the ancient Greek word for “earth measurement.” Geometry, one of the world’s oldest math- i ematical practices, was created as a way to interpret shape, and it is still used to this day. Even though conceptual geometry goes back to the s dawn of civilization, geometric constructions do not. Constructions are the part of geometry where one “constructs” geometric figures on paper, us- c ing basic tools. These tools include a compass, straightedge, and a pencil.

The Greeks revolutionized the way people make geometric constructions.

Geometry originated merely as a way to survey land, take mea- e surement, or to design nearly anything. As time, and technology progressed, mankind’s knowledge of shape became more sophisticated. l Some advances included formulas to find circumference and the area of different shapes. The first forms of geometry are known today sim- l ply as Plane Geometry. It was not until around 300 BC that a mathematician named Euclid redefined how Geometry was practiced. a

Little is known about the life of Euclid, but what is known about him includes all of the written proofs he made in his lifetime. He is often referred to as the “Father of Geometry” and he also changed the way n people construct geometric figures. No one knows who invented the compass, but Euclid certainly implemented it, along with the straightedge into e his work. In his work The Elements, a book of axioms and other geometric theories, Euclid also showed how basic constructions could be made. o

One of the most basic construction tools of all is the compass, a drawing tool that can be used for creating circles or arcs. It can also be used u for determining distances on paper. For centuries, sailors and explorers used the compass to determine distances between locations they were traveling.

The compass is a relatively simple tool, but has the ability to do so much. s

T

The other basic construction tool is a straightedge. The straightedge is essentially an unmarked ruler. What makes the combination of the straightedge and the compass so special is the ability they give to find out nearly anything with just the two tools. Before universal measurement -61-

Standard Candle

m i s c e l l a n e o u s

units were implemented in society, there was no way of simply finding the center of any object. With a compass and straight edge, however, one can not only find the center of a segment but also of any shape or object.

Line designs can be found in almost everything people see today, in architecture, automobiles, and clothes. They are also in circles and knot designs.

Nearly every shape can be made with a straightedge and compass. Geometry can be an art form in itself. For example, the people of ancient Persia became famous for their elaborately designed carpets and dresses. They were one of the first civilizations to combine knowledge of fabric making and geometry to make art.

In addition, line design can be found in many forms of old and new architecture. In modern day architecture, it is impossible to create a structure without basic geometry formulas. Bisecting lines and angles, as well as figuring out distances, would be impossible without geometry. Architect Franklin Lloyd Wright, for example, was influenced by line design to create his houses and rooms. Wright is known for the simplicity of his work. Much of our design today comes thanks to the Greeks, who were one of the first civilizations to use geometry in design.

-62-

Morristown-Beard School

Dylan Iuzzolino, â&#x20AC;&#x2DC;15

Submitted By Mark Hartman

a r t s y

-63-

Standard Candle

Jaynie Siegel, ‘12

Submitted By Mike Kelly

m i s c e l l a n e o u s

The Turning Point to Reality

I

n every person’s life, there is a moment, a turning point of events and emotions, or a ground-breaking revelation. In A Clockwork Orange and The Truman Show the two main characters, Alex and Truman Burbank, find themselves inevitably grounded in societies that are misleading and poisonous. Alex, the anti-establishment, adolescent misfit goes about his life conducting murders, rapes, and beatings with the intention of feeling whole. Nevertheless, in Part III of the book, his world is ultimately flipped upside down when he is released from the possession of the state, and as a result, his life is permanently changed. His ability to inflict pain on others diminishes, and his freedoms and limitations are made much clearer to him. Truman Burbank conducts his life in a way quite dissimilar to that of Alex’s. He goes about his days in a routine fashion, fulfilling tasks and going to work without any hint of suspicion. It is not until a particular scene in the film that Truman begins to realize that the people around him have some form of control over his life, thereby affecting the direction in which his life is heading. Both Alex and Truman feel as though they are leading their lives based on the decisions they make themselves; however, after a significant transition, these characters are made aware of the bitter reality that their lives are built upon the worlds created for them by others.

For the majority of the story, Alex finds himself deriving pleasure from the evil decisions he makes, gradually becoming accustomed to a life filled with immorality. As a reckless danger to society, he develops a sense of disregard for the safety of those around him, leading figures of higher authority to step in and intervene by taking away his personal freedom of choice. Ultimately, Alex is forced to comply with the standards set for him by the government. This is the most obvious turning point in the text. He emerges from treatment a new, controlled member of society, forced to live under the ideals of determinism rather than free will. It is at this time that Alex begins to fully understand just how circumscribed his world has become.

Before he is treated, Alex exercises his free will by caving in to his horrific compulsions, but once he is released, his lack of human freedom is obvious when he is no longer allowed or tempted to go about fulfilling his former antics. Alex’s human freedoms are undeni-64-

Morristown-Beard School

ably lessened in order to benefit society as a whole. In addition, even though he is more likely to be good to those around him as a result, he is still ridded of the ability to make good or evil decisions on his own.

Truman Burbank lives in a world that is fabricated and circumscribed in order to satisfy millions of TV-viewers around the world. Incognizant of the scripted lives of those surrounding him, and the intrusive strangers invading his privacy throughout the day, he insists on being good all the time, acting morally yet non-consenting at the same time. Truman is ultimately denied free will from the instant he is born, because his life is meant to appease people around the world. There is a strong presence of good and evil in the movie, and Truman’s discovery of the two sides eventually leads to his escape from Seahaven. A series of small events represents Truman’s revelation in the movie, beginning with the moment where his loved ones appear evil to him by restricting his freedom to go where he pleases. Truman’s eventual escape from Seahaven is the only immoral action that he chooses to take, yet by the time he is done acting vengefully, he is fully aware of the wrongdoing he has committed, and virtually unaffected by the consequences. Due to his awareness of the evil and selfish intentions of the actors around him, Truman uses his human freedom to act against those who restricted him, and salvage all of his rights and liberties in the real world.

The prime element of life that separates humans from other animals is the human freedom and capability to make choices. Humans have in-born intelligence to determine what is right and wrong, good and evil. Both Alex and Truman live their lives in a way that seems free, but there is an underlying force that manages to restrain their freedoms. The uncertain line between free will and determinism is prominent within these two stories, because Truman is able to act “freely” under the limitations set by Christof, and Alex is able to act “freely” based on the standards set by society and the government. The circumscribed worlds that these two characters live in are nothing short of depriving and misleading, and they are ultimately responsible for taking away Alex and Truman’s human freedoms. The turning points in each of the stories make the characters aware of the lives they have been forced to live, and give them the courage to break out and create their own new paths for the future.

-65-

m i s c e l l a n e o u s

Standard Candle

Jared Silver, ‘14

Submitted mike keLLy

desiRe foR maRTyRdom

m i s c e l l a n e o u s

J

.D. CatcherInInthe theRye Ryefollows follows aa boy boy named named Holden Holden .D. Salinger’s Salinger’s The Catcher Caulfield who wanders through New York in the days prior to his parents’ discovery of his expulsion from school. Narrated in the first person, Holden’s personality is revealed by his personal musings as well as his recollections of interactions with peers and strangers alike. Many things Holden does are strange, snobby, kind, even humorous. And yet, while these traits are evident, Salinger writes with a subtlety that makes reading between the lines a vital necessity to understanding Holden’s adolescent angst. By pondering the small things Holden does, his true quest is revealed. The Catcher In the Rye by J.D. Salinger is the story of Holden’s realization that he can never achieve what he most desires: he can never achieve martyrdom.

The closest Holden comes to literally admitting this is during his first conversation with Phoebe. Annoyed by her brother’s lack of care about school or anything at all, Phoebe demands that Holden “name one thing” that he likes (220). Holden fails to answer her. When he tries to, he cannot think of anything he likes until he remembers the nuns he spoke to earlier in the day. From this, he then introduces another peer from his memory. The boy, named James Castle, went to school with Holden years ago. Holden explains that James had insulted some conceited boy at the school. After refusing to revoke his comment, the conceited boy came to James’ dorm room with a group of his friends. Again, he demanded that James take back his insult, yet James proudly refused. The group did things to James Holden describes as “repulsive” (221). Still, James would not take back what he said, and instead leapt out the window to his death. This being an awful story, it is strange that it comes to Holden’s mind when he is asked to name something he likes. Yet, it is not the physical death of James that Holden admires, but rather the motivation for the suicide. Holden describes James as a “skinny little weak-looking guy, with wrists about as big as pencils” (221). A scrawny boy who accepts death before backing away from his beliefs. If that is not familiar enough, Salinger dons him with the initials J.C. The correlation to the other J.C. was undoubtedly intentional.

The reason Holden “likes” this story is because it is a parallel to the tale of Jesus’ death. And what Holden desires most, what he admires most, is purity.

-66-

Morristown-Beard School

Suicide is another way Holden expresses this feverish desire to be pure. On more than one occasion, the protagonist has thoughts of suicide.

The first instance is shortly after the incident with Maurice. Holden claims that what he really feels like doing is jumping out the window. He continues by saying that he “probably would’ve done it, too, if [he’d] been sure somebody’d cover [him] up as soon as [he] landed. [He] didn’t want a bunch of stupid rubbernecks looking at [him] when [he] was all gory” (136). Clearly, he has serious considerations about killing himself. Interestingly, in Christianity, suicide is forbidden while the similar action of martyrdom is idolized.

Holden does perhaps wish to end his life, but he does not do so here, because the motivation would be his own problems. What he considers pure is dying for a belief, for a cause. A connecting quote later on further proves this. After stating his appreciation for the atomic bomb, Holden swears, “If there’s ever another war, I’m going to sit right the hell on top of [the atom bomb]. I’ll volunteer for it, I swear to God I will” (183). His mentioning of a war implies a clash involving more than just himself. Similar to the previous quote, Holden expresses a blatant willingness, even a desire, to end his own life. However the latter quote hosts the idea of dying for a cause, or for others. For this reason Holden would have no problem dying in this scenario. James Castle’s death shows only Holden’s admiration for the act of martyrdom. The narrated proof just quoted goes beyond. Holden does not simply revere the act of dying for a belief, he wants to be the one dying for a belief. He wants to be a martyr.

Holden is not all talk though. In the scene with Maurice, Holden takes a beating for refusing to pay the full price for the prostitute. He’s trying to pull a James Castle type of move here by sacrificing his body rather than give in to an opposing opinion. Later, in the midst of Mr. Antolini’s “lecture”, he tells Holden that the “‘mark of the immature man is that he wants to die nobly for a cause’” (244). “‘[Antolini] can very clearly see [Holden] dying nobly, one way or another, for some highly unworthy cause’” (244). Although Holden does try to mimic martyrdom, he misunderstands the idea. The belief a martyr dies for must be worthy.

This is the final point of the thesis. The failure. Holden obviously does not like much. In fact, he doesn’t really like anything at all apart from Allie and Phoebe. Allie, being dead already, Phoebe remains as literally the one thing in the world Holden cares for. She is the only thing that can help Holden die as a martyr. Phoebe is a child though, a good-natured girl with little danger in her life, and so honestly there is not an opportunity for Holden to die for her. That leaves him with nothing. It is impossible to die as a martyr -67-

m i s c e l l a n e o u s

Standard Candle

for something you do not believe in. Not believing in anything then, how can Holden ever achieve martyrdom? The answer is, he cannot. The entire story, his thoughts, interactions, memories, they are all proof that the roots of Holdenâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s angst lie with his impossible dream. Holden Caulfield loves nothing but martyrdom. He cannot die for martyrdom, but he cannot become a martyr without dying for something he loves.

This catch-22 has him trapped, and though Holden may not come to terms with it, Salinger allows the reader to witness this tragic failure.

-68-