Crochet Cervantes/The Lost Adventures of Lew Lazarow and the Case of the Magic Missiles
We were just sitting around doing nothing trying to reach the last crumbs of the potato chips left in the bag, wondering if the Lew Lazarow played Dungeons and Dragons in his college days, d20's rolling pell-mell on the dorm room table, as the latest episode of Star Trek: TNG played, sound muted, in the background, ancient containers of Chinese food, lying dejected on the counter, by now having developed their own ecosystems and Rhombii of Life. It then occured to us, struck as if by Magic Missiles, or as if eveloped suddenly by a gelatinous cube, or perhaps decaptitated viciously with a +5 Vorpel sword of wounding, that we seemed to have left the English post of the day unposted. We had left unattended English blog, unattended. Left the words to be spoken, unspoken. Since Matt's last posts, no one has posted for fear of eviceration by him, Theresa or some other shadowy, mysterous miscreant or assassin with a command of the English language, the likes of which only last seen in the days of Harry Truman's "give 'em hell" speeches. Therefore, to encourage the proliferation of future posts, we, Adiel and Matt, have decided to forward a thesis which may challange your beliefs and make you question your sexuality.
Crochet Cervantes, as we call, for reasons left politely unexamined, but obviously having something to do with fact that we're not French, St. John de Crevecoeur, was, in true, empirical, quantitated fact, in our humblest opinions, which can only be supported by recourse to the divine right of kings or perhaps by turning to a dusty page of good old Thomas Aquinus, or more properly, the famously beared Karl Marx's Das Kapital, was a complete, utter, swarthy, smelly, hippy, pinko, swarthy, red, swarthy, Commie Communist of the Marxist order.
Why, you ask? Well, friends, Cervantes held the opinion that America was a vast agricultural paradise, where farmers, in socialistic glee, joined sickle and hoe, under the Leninist banner. Agriculture, at the time, was the means of production. The vast class of farmers, embodying the dream of a dictatorship of the proletariat, hoe, hoe, hoed away at their landholdings, ignoring any thoughts of class conflict. According to Crevevoeur, there was none. In the year, stardate 2223.17, the filthy bourgeois windmills had all been eradicated in a violent uprising. The colonists, led by George Washington Carver, attired magnificently in a zoot-suit and doo-rag, managed to crochet the wings of the windmills to the ground recalling the famous exploits against the AT-AT walkers in the Rebel skirmith on the planet Hoth. But I digress.
The point was that Cervantes was aware of class confict, he, in fact, noted its existance in Europe and distinctly noted, that, to an extent, it, rather, did not exist, or rather not at all existed, partially, in the United (sort of) States. And as for the calling for immigrants to move to the US? Doesn't that just sound like the favorite catchphrase of those LIBBY, PINKO, COMMIE, SWARTHY, COMMIE, COMMIE, COMMIE, SWARTHY, COMMMIE, COMMIE, PINKO, COMMIE, REDDS; CiTiZeN oF tHe WoRlD? Last I check, that's always used as an excuse to go visit the other side of the Berlin wall while our great leader RONALD REAGAN was in office!!!!!1111!!!one!!1!!!!!
For instance this quote illustrates just what a fetish he had for Whistler's mother, "Let us suppose you and I to be travelling...William Penn himself would...wish...a good farmer...who implictly believes the rules laid down by the synod of Dort... You may be an ambassador to England or France, you might like to gamble, you might like to dance, you might be the heavyweight champion of the world, you might be a socialite with a long string of pearls, but you gonna have to serve somebody (Chorus: serve somebody!), serve some-body, (Chorus: serve somebody!)...Religion seems to have still less influence, and their manners are less improved." COMMIES! And their manners? SHAVE YOUR BEARDS, YOU SWARTHY, COMMIE, PINKO SOVIETS... SWARTHY!
Conclusion.
Lovingly, Adiel and Matt.
aNd sTeP iT uP!!!!!!!
Here's looking at you, Dan.
Crochet Cervantes, as we call, for reasons left politely unexamined, but obviously having something to do with fact that we're not French, St. John de Crevecoeur, was, in true, empirical, quantitated fact, in our humblest opinions, which can only be supported by recourse to the divine right of kings or perhaps by turning to a dusty page of good old Thomas Aquinus, or more properly, the famously beared Karl Marx's Das Kapital, was a complete, utter, swarthy, smelly, hippy, pinko, swarthy, red, swarthy, Commie Communist of the Marxist order.
Why, you ask? Well, friends, Cervantes held the opinion that America was a vast agricultural paradise, where farmers, in socialistic glee, joined sickle and hoe, under the Leninist banner. Agriculture, at the time, was the means of production. The vast class of farmers, embodying the dream of a dictatorship of the proletariat, hoe, hoe, hoed away at their landholdings, ignoring any thoughts of class conflict. According to Crevevoeur, there was none. In the year, stardate 2223.17, the filthy bourgeois windmills had all been eradicated in a violent uprising. The colonists, led by George Washington Carver, attired magnificently in a zoot-suit and doo-rag, managed to crochet the wings of the windmills to the ground recalling the famous exploits against the AT-AT walkers in the Rebel skirmith on the planet Hoth. But I digress.
The point was that Cervantes was aware of class confict, he, in fact, noted its existance in Europe and distinctly noted, that, to an extent, it, rather, did not exist, or rather not at all existed, partially, in the United (sort of) States. And as for the calling for immigrants to move to the US? Doesn't that just sound like the favorite catchphrase of those LIBBY, PINKO, COMMIE, SWARTHY, COMMIE, COMMIE, COMMIE, SWARTHY, COMMMIE, COMMIE, PINKO, COMMIE, REDDS; CiTiZeN oF tHe WoRlD? Last I check, that's always used as an excuse to go visit the other side of the Berlin wall while our great leader RONALD REAGAN was in office!!!!!1111!!!one!!1!!!!!
For instance this quote illustrates just what a fetish he had for Whistler's mother, "Let us suppose you and I to be travelling...William Penn himself would...wish...a good farmer...who implictly believes the rules laid down by the synod of Dort... You may be an ambassador to England or France, you might like to gamble, you might like to dance, you might be the heavyweight champion of the world, you might be a socialite with a long string of pearls, but you gonna have to serve somebody (Chorus: serve somebody!), serve some-body, (Chorus: serve somebody!)...Religion seems to have still less influence, and their manners are less improved." COMMIES! And their manners? SHAVE YOUR BEARDS, YOU SWARTHY, COMMIE, PINKO SOVIETS... SWARTHY!
Conclusion.
Lovingly, Adiel and Matt.
aNd sTeP iT uP!!!!!!!
Here's looking at you, Dan.
posted by L Lazarow | 10:49 PM
3 Comments:
i'm posing a new thought without comment to matt and adiel's in attempt to promote the feeling of "you can post whatever you want without getting bulleted" until things calm down...
As mentioned in class, the document presents a "let's be American" essence. Crevecoer's description of what an Englishman would see as he becomes aquainted with America is an image of an opportunity-filled environment. At first, this may have sounded as if it was directed to those who have been previously successful in seeking and making the most of opportunities; however Crevecour distinguishes that the opportunities are available to even the "idle," the "useless," and the "poor." Thus, even those previously "lowly" people are placed in the position where they, too, can aquire "riches."
When Crevecour specified exactly what he meant by "riches" ("better sort of wealth, cleared lands, cattle, good houses, good cloathes, and an increase of people to enjoy them"), I was reminded of the excerpt from the Declaration of Independence: " that they (the people of the US) are endowed..with inherent and inalienable rights; that among these are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness." We know that the phrase had been mentioned before with a slight variation (in the Declaration of Colonial Rights): "property" was used in place of "pursuit of happiness." I believe this presents a move from specific to general. Rather than focusing in on property being an unalienable right of a US citizen, the phrase was changed to apply to the other possible desires a citizen could have in order to achieve happiness (whether it be land or not). Crevecour presented this idea in his description of "riches" since he specified that he didn't mean riches in the sense of monetary objects but rather cattle, land, houses, and company. Crevecour used more humble references (as opposed to gold and silver) to describe the "riches" people in America could aquire so that people of lower statuses could relate to what he was saying and accept his words rather than dismissing them as farfetched, unacheivable ideals.
Crevecour mentions the lack of largely significant differences between the houses belonging to those who are more well off compared to those with less wealth: "A pleasing uniformity of decent competence appears throughout our habitations." This also appeals to the mediocre person who would prefer not to have constant reminders of what they haven't accomplished (wealth to live in mansions) but would rather live in a community that appears to recognize their successes.
Though I expected to enjoy Crevecoeur's nationalistic, idealistic depiction of the "British colonies" (AKA America), the pleasure was mixed with more than a dash of cynicism on my part.
It's interesting that Crevecouer quoted Latin as the motto of all emigrants, "Ubi panis ibi patria." Translated, that means "Where (there is) bread, there (is my) country." Perhaps I am wrong to make this inference, but I was of the impression that only the upper class would be well-educated enough to translate Latin. To that extent, the use of Latin wouldn't necessarily get Crevecouer's point across to his target audience in the best possible manner. (And now I show my other assumption--that the main appeal of Crevecouer's work is to the poor/lower classes.)
One of my favorite bits of nationalism in Letter III is the following sentence: "The Americans ought therefore to love this country much better than that wherein either he or his forefathers were born."
Crevecouer's regional analyses of Americans were things which I found particularly interesting; it caused me to wonder to what extent his generalizations actually applied. Regardless of how apt his analyses were, their effectiveness was demonstrated to me when I found myself nodding along with a lot of Crevecouer's observations and conclusions. I felt that he took some of his generalizations a bit to the extreme, but being a member of the 21st century, I'm not REALLY in the place to judge.
When speaking of the "great woods, near the last inhabited districts," Crevecouer stated that the men were "farther beyond the reach of government" and drew the conclusion that the men were "often in a perfect state of war; that of man against man; that of man against every wild inhabitant of these venerable woods. [...] Men appear to be no better than carnivorous animals of a superior rank."
That particular passage absolutely screamed HOBBES to me. Hobbes was a philosopher of the Enlightenment who said that in a state of nature, men's lives were "nasty, brutish, and short." Living in the American woods, far beyond the reach of government, is certainly something of a parallel to the state of nature that Hobbes mentioned.
One more morsel to chew on: Crevecouer's "nationalism" didn't seem to be on at all times. When speaking of the provinces, he wrote that the provinces had "strong differences, which will grow more evident in time." He later said that eventually the various provinces' "only points of unity will be those of religion and language." That doesn't sound very nationalistic to my ears, but perhaps my classmates will have a different take.
I agree that Crevecoeur's statement that "the inhabitants of Canada, Massachusetts, the middle provinces, the southern ones will be as different as their climates; their only points of unity will be those of religion and language" isn’t very nationalistic. The majority of this document is very idealist and paints America as if it's a perfect nation, so this statement makes the writing seem a little more realistic by admitting one fault of America--it's no too unified. If the whole document only talked about how perfect America was, people reading this in Europe might have been skeptical, feeling that his letter was too good to be true. A little humility makes the letter more believable. Also, I find it fascinating that Crevecoer felt that Canada, Massachusetts, the middle provinces, and the southern provinces were different and divided. Historically, Massachusetts was set apart because it was one of the oldest colonies, and the fact that there were the witch trials about 90 years earlier show that it was somewhat isolated from other states. Canada will become its own country, and the South will prove to be different from the North because the Civil War will break out about 80 years into the future.
Although Crevecoer is honest about people in the wilderness being more barbarous and regional differences in America, the majority is still very idealistic in tone. Some of the strongest examples I found were the following statements: "we know, properly speaking, no strangers," "he beholds hardly any poor, he seldom hears of punishment and executions," "here you will find but few crimes," and "it is now purged, a general decency of manners prevails throughout." These statements seem a little too good to be true, but were still very appealing to poor Europeans, who were inspired to immigrate to America. Crevecoer also used easily understandable imagery to attract the common European, despite some Latin talk.
Crevecoer uses mainly a plant motif. He states, "in Europe they were as so many useless plants, wanting vegetative mould, and refreshing showers; they withered, and were mowed down by want, hunger, and war; but now by the power of transplantation, like all other plants they have taken root and flourished!" This metaphor shows the common person that they can flourish just like plants if they find themselves the better and more livable environment of America. Also, he stated that "men are like plants; the goodness and flavour of the fruit proceeds from the peculiar soil and exposition in which they grow." This again shows common Europeans that they can become better people if they move to America.
Crevecoer also attracts Europeans by pointing out to them that it will be easy to fit in because America is diverse both ethnically and religiously, and ethnicities and religions are becoming combined. He states, "I could point out to you a family whose grandfather was an Englishman, whose wife was Dutch, whose son married a French woman, and whose present four sons have now four wives of different nations," and "let us suppose you and I to be traveling; we observe that in this house, to the right, lives a Catholic...his neighbor may be a good plodding German Lutheran...next to him lives a seceder... next again lives a good Dutchman." These statements show outsiders that America has a little bit of all nations, so they will assimilate no matter where they are from, and also shows that America lacks prejudice against different cultures and religions. This again is idealistic because we all know that racism and religious intolerance are still present in America today.
Lastly, one of Crevecoer’s statements reflected Locke’s theories very well. He says, "Whence the government? It is derived from the original genius and strong desire of the people ratified and confirmed by the crown." This reflects Locke’s theory that government is a social contract with the people, who created the government to protect their unalienable rights. This statement also shows that people are rational beings who can create a government, since they have a "genius."
Post a Comment
<< Home