Diego Rivera, Pan-American Unity
Diego Rivera, Pan-American Unity
Monday, April 4, 2011
Homage To MR.Hughes
Paule Marshall Homage To MR. Hughes 1) A. Do you think that a writer/ societal figure in today’s society who speaks out against America would be selected to travel the world all expenses paid like Marshall? B. If so , who do you have in mind and why ? 2)During the briefing in the State Department office do you think there was a reason to leave Marshall’s folder out where it was easily visible.? Refer to page 132 3) On page 139 -140 when Marshall discusses the African House incident ,do you think Hughes was angry towards the ignorance of the European audience or was it something else? Refer to quote “there was monumental work still to be done he concluded”
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2) I think leaving Marshall's folder out in plain sight was a subtle warning (i.e. "we know who you are and what you have been up to; we've been keeping an eye on you") or as a means to intimidate her. Perhaps it was meant to keep her "in check"; the State Department will tolerate her behavior to a certain point (rallying and protesting) so long as she does not cross the line. Perhaps, too, they wanted her to feel grateful for the opportunity to travel overseas despite her extensive record. This proves that the United States government condones free speech. As Marshall writes, "The fact that I would be openly critical of its policies could well serve as proof that the country was truly a democracy committed to respecting the First Amendment rights of even its most vocal detractors" (134).
ReplyDelete3) I think Hughes was angry the students were so unconscious and unaware of the history of the struggle for blacks worldwide. Hughes seemed to have felt they were trying to simplify the process, while failing to take into account how much he and many other men and women participated in the movement long before they even came into existence. Hughes wants these students to educate themselves before making judgements and coming to conclusions about further steps, when not knowing about the ones made prior.
ReplyDelete1)a. Even the most modest of societies (anyone burning electricity) is well aware of Americans' uses of their big mouths -good or bad. So, there is no longer a need to fund such a tour as our free speech policies have been publicized on a grand scale. I think the main reason for this tour was to prevent communism from spreading to Western Europe. These writers were there to remind their audience what they would be giving up if they chose to convert.
ReplyDeleteNow a days America is way more concerned with fighting our fat cat greedy public persona. So we have beautiful, charitable people unleashed to represent us. I.E. Angelina Jolie, George Clooney. These people completely ignore America's participation in global conflicts (At least I think they do, I do not follow their philanthropy closely) and focus on correcting rather than reflecting and blaming. (And we pay these people very well)
Langston Hughes was angry at these ignorant youths for dismissing who allowed them their entitlement to these types of criticism. They did not hear a word the panel or the literature screamed, but were too busy listening to their own inflated sense of self. Hughes was simply reiterating – LOUDLY to ensure they would hear this time around- how they came to be there; both the writers and the students.
2) During the briefing in the State Department office, Paule Marshall’s folder was easily visible. This was no accident. It was instead a way for the State Department to show that the government had kept a close eye on Ms. Marshall’s previous radicalized activities. It was therefore made clear to her that the government would be quite aware of her behavior on this tour with Mr. Hughes. So, the implied message to Ms. Marshall was to moderate her political views against the government.
ReplyDelete3) Regarding the African House incident, I don’t think that Hughes was really that angry towards the ignorance of the European audience. He was simply frustrated with the “number of young British-born blacks in the audience” that were personally attacking him. Hughes made his position clear. He educated his audience by informing them that the struggle for civil rights was an ongoing “revolution.” Hughes then spoke about the role he and his generation had played, which included marching, demonstrating and picketing. He had also been in the fight to free the Scottsboro Boys in 1931. Obviously, he had played an important role in this battle to achieve civil rights for his people. His time had passed, yet “there was monumental work still to be done he concluded.” He realized that it was now up to a new generation of black leaders to take charge and continue the “revolution” that he and his generation had started.
Lyndsey Rosario wrote:
ReplyDelete1) I personally believe that a writer or a societal figure who speaks out against America freely should be able to travel the world with expenses paid like Marshall did. America is known for its freedom of speech and the ability to express your feelings openly. Many may not agree with your opinions, but you still have the right to say how you feel. I can also understand why it wouldn't be acceptable for all to do this. For example, many people today still leave their countries hoping for a better life in America, but yet complain about the country. These people are also getting an education and jobs here so I don't think it's okay to bash it, because if you don't like it, don't come here. I guess to further illustrate my point, If you're an American (born in America) I guess I could understand why people don't like this country and its acceptable to speak out against it, but if you're coming here from a different country I don't think it would be that great. If I went to live in a different country, someplace where I was given things that my country didn't allow or didn't offer I wouldn't have the audacity to say something negative about it. i would appreciate the experience and be thankful that it is better than where I was living. To get back to the main point, Marshall was an American citizen who knows how this country is so I do believe she's able to speak out about it publicly.