Skip to main content

What is 'American' about American literature?

In his essay "Paleface and Redskin" (The Kenyon Review, 1939), the 20th century literary critic Philip Rahv went a long way to defining what is uniquely "American" in American literature. Rahv posited that American letters has produced two "polar types" of writers. On one hand, there is the "paleface," writers such as Henry James with his "drawing-room fictions" and Herman Melville, who was, in his "tragic loneliness," acutely interested in what William Faulkner would later call "the problems of the human heart in conflict with itself." On the other hand were the "redskins," writers such as Walt Whitman, with his "open air poems," and Mark Twain, who tended to revel in adventures and new experiences rather than contemplate life from afar with "a refined estrangement from reality." Moreover, Rahv argued that the redskin was more of a "lowbrow," uneducated (whether he was or not) and intensely aware of emotions and spontaneity rather than "personal culture." The redskin might choose to write a description of a war or some masculine endeavor. The paleface was "highbrow," concerned more with the intellectual. He might write something which attempts to get at the meaning of religion or man's refinement of his spirit.


Throughout American history it is possible to divide American writers into these two categories. Early in America's history writers such as James Fenimore Cooper, with his wilderness adventures and pitched battles, and Washington Irving, with his tales of the common man, might be labeled redskins, while William Cullen Bryant, especially in his reveries on nature, and Jonathan Edwards, in his pontifications on religion, are definitely palefaces. In the 20th century it could be said that a writer like F. Scott Fitzgerald was a paleface because of his concentration on mostly "polite" society and the doings of the rich and influential. In contrast, John Steinbeck was a redskin with his stories about "Okies," "bindle-stiffs," prostitutes and the seedier elements of American society. Some writers, however, might defy these labels. Henry David Thoreau could be at least partly redskin in his descriptions of everyday life on Walden Pond, but it is probably more comfortable with the palefaces because of his tendencies to look at life as a contemplative endeavor.


In the 21st century it could at least be somewhat argued that this dichotomy remains in American literature. Novels such as The Road or No Country for Old Men by Cormac McCarthy represent the redskin in their adventure and willingness to present the grittier side of American life. In the paleface category might be writers such as Dan Brown who has created a series of books which seem to concentrate on the spiritual aspects of the world. In any case, the paleface/redskin labels are still relevant in American culture. 

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Is there a word/phrase for "unperformant"?

As a software engineer, I need to sometimes describe a piece of code as something that lacks performance or was not written with performance in mind. Example: This kind of coding style leads to unmaintainable and unperformant code. Based on my Google searches, this isn't a real word. What is the correct way to describe this? EDIT My usage of "performance" here is in regard to speed and efficiency. For example, the better the performance of code the faster the application runs. My question and example target the negative definition, which is in reference to preventing inefficient coding practices. Answer This kind of coding style leads to unmaintainable and unperformant code. In my opinion, reads more easily as: This coding style leads to unmaintainable and poorly performing code. The key to well-written documentation and reports lies in ease of understanding. Adding poorly understood words such as performant decreases that ease. In addressing the use of such a poorly ...

A man has a garden measuring 84 meters by 56 meters. He divides it into the minimum number of square plots. What is the length of the square plots?

We wish to divide this man's garden into the minimum number of square plots possible. A square has all four sides with the same length.Our garden is a rectangle, so the answer is clearly not 1 square plot. If we choose the wrong length for our squares, we may end up with missing holes or we may not be able to fit our squares inside the garden. So we have 84 meters in one direction and 56 meters in the other direction. When we start dividing the garden in square plots, we are "filling" those lengths in their respective directions. At each direction, there must be an integer number of squares (otherwise, we get holes or we leave the garden), so that all the square plots fill up the garden nicely. Thus, our job here is to find the greatest common divisor of 84 and 56. For this, we prime factor both of them: `56 = 2*2*2*7` `84 = 2*2*3*7` We can see that the prime factors and multiplicities in common are `2*2*7 = 28` . This is the desired length of the square plots. If you wi...

What warning does Chuchundra issue to Rikki?

Chuchundra, the sniveling, fearful muskrat who creeps around walls because he is too terrified to go into the center of a room, meets Rikki in the middle of the night. He insults Rikki by begging him not to kill him. He then insults him by suggesting that Nag might mistake Chuchundra for Rikki. He says, "Those who kill snakes get killed by snakes."  He issues this warning to Rikki not to help keep Rikki safe but as a way of explaining why Rikki's presence gives him, Chuchundra, more reason to fear.  Chuchundra starts to tell Rikki what Chua the rat told him--but breaks it off when he realizes he might be overheard by Nag. He says, "Nag is everywhere, Rikki-Tikki." Rikki threatens to bite Chuchundra to get him to talk. Even then, Chuchundra won't overtly reveal any information. But he does say, "Can't you hear, Rikki-Tikki?" This is enough of a clue for the clever mongoose. He listens carefully and can just make out the "faintest scratch-s...