Well, other than the final of course.

But still. That was the last class we’ll ever have. Unless, I suppose, someone decides that they love the class so much that they need to take it again. Now, I’m afraid that isn’t me, but I didn’t dislike the class.

In fact, I rather enjoyed it. I found quite a few of the books that we read interesting. And they certainly gave us a good overview of the history of British novels. I mean, I feel that a number of them were significant in their representation of a genre or time period in British literary history.

And, of course, we got some pretty big name authors in there.

Chaucer, and his Canterbury Tales. Hard to imagine taking a Brit Lit class without reading at least one of these.

Shakespeare was an obvious choice as well.

Ann Radcliffe. Now, I hadn’t actually heard of her before, but it is clear that she was a significant author of those Gothic novels.

Jane Austen. Once again an obvious choice, although not Northanger Abbey in particular. I did like that it was basically a satire of the gothic novels that we had already read some of.

Sir Walter Scott. Another big name, and it focused on a big historical time period for Britain.

Equiano. A very impressive slave narrative, which obviously highlighted Britain’s breaking away from the slave trade.

And William Godwin. Once again, a significant name with an interesting book.

But what I find interesting is that Caleb specifically says that what he is writing is the absolute truth, and that it should be apparent because of how his story unfolds. I find this interesting because of course everything Caleb says is untrue. After all, he is a fictional character.

I just can’t imagine that Godwin could write those words without realizing their irony. So I wonder why he did write them. Perhaps he was saying that there is no absolute truth, and that even completely fictional stories could claim to be true, and it is far too easy to believe them.

I suppose that would fit in with the end of the novel, where Caleb says that he just wanted to make sure people weren’t hearing a half-told, mangled tale. I mean, Caleb’s own story is obviously the same.

So, maybe that is one of the major points of the story.

I also find the treatment of Equiano worth considering. As was said in class, he really seems to take a back seat in the movie, as opposed to how he seems in the book. In the movie his main effort seems to be telling that main character to get on board with the anti-slavery movement. He hardly seems to be actively doing anything against it himself.

I mean, he does publish his book to great acclaim and all, but that seems to be it. That and giving tours of slave ships.

Oh, and saying that he was once a prince in Africa before they took him to the West Indies. That, by the way, doesn’t sound quite right. He was the son of the chieftain in his tribe, but I got the impression that he wouldn’t be called a prince just because of that. Also, he was a slave long before he left Africa.

I don’t know. It just seems odd that they would have him say that in the movie.

Admittedly, a lot of this wasn’t his choice at all. I mean, he would probably just have stayed in his village his entire life if not for the slavers who took him away. And even then he certainly wouldn’t have left African if he wasn’t sold into slavery to the West Indies. And, once again, he probably never would have left there if he wasn’t sold to the masters he was sold to.

But still. Few people as so well traveled. I mean, he has visited or lived in Africa, North America, and Europe. For some time, even. He also visited Turkey, which is basically the border of Europe and Asia, and definitely another culture altogether.

And he even went on an expedition to the North Pole, however briefly. I mean, how many people can say that? Especially in their time period.

I just have to wonder how much all of these travels affected him. I mean, who would he be if he had just stayed in Africa, and would that man resemble well-traveled Equiano at all?

However, we don’t play the exact same instruments. You see, the French Horn has undergone a number of revisions and evolutions over the past few centuries, and is not now what it was before.

I do believe that Equiano played it’s last major form, the natural horn.

To help you understand the difference between the forms, I think that pictures may be necessary.

Here is a picture of the modern French Horn:

And a picture of the Natural Horn, what Equiano likely played:

I suppose that those pictures may not help you understand the difference between the two horns on a level other than purely visual unless you have an understanding of brass instruments, but oh well.

I just found it interesting that Equiano and I had something in common.

And, while he paints the slavery he went through in Africa in, surprisingly, not too hard of a light, I don’t think that it really does it justice. I mean, if Equiano hadn’t gone through the horrors of the international slave trade as well, I doubt that he would have been so kind to his African slavers.

And then the slave ship. Really, the slave ship was particularly powerful image. Equiano really managed to capture the horror of it in a way that no third party ever could.

I am not so sure how he managed to survive all of this in such a way that allowed him to become the man he did.

He needs to establish the world that he was in before he was captured and sold into slavery in the Americas and England. This cannot be done without discussing the culture, and other basics of his tribe. Without that, how would people know where he was coming from?

Especially those people who approved of slavery because it was ‘civilizing’ the African slaves. Equiano needed to show that his tribe wasn’t so barbaric. While they did have differences with English society, and certainly were not nearly as advanced technology-wise, they weren’t entirely savage. They were a real people who did not deserve what they got, and were not improved by slavery.

Also, Equiano does go on to describe some of his childhood. It was also important for him to describe the setting of his childhood in detail before he could really get into the events that happened there.

I mean, he basically just told the army that he was leaving for a little while, and for them not to wait up. What were they to think, really? That he was still a completely loyal subject, even though he had basically abandoned his army posting? Edward really didn’t think that through.

I guess that he just thought that he was entitled to go wherever he wanted because of his name, and the fact that he had never really had much discipline before. He didn’t realize that he was kind of bound to stay with the army, I suppose.

And then, later, he actually fights with the Jacobites.

I really do think that it was a miracle that Talbot was able to secure Royal protection for him.

So, I found an amusing comic about Bonnie Prince Charlie and the Battle of Culloden. And I can safely say that it doesn’t paint poor Charlie in the best light. But I do kind of agree.

Even though, in Waverley, Charles was able to persuade Waverley to join his cause, I didn’t really get the impression that he’d be out fighting on the front lines with them. Or, you know, at all. I mean, you don’t exactly stay alive in his position for very long if you are constantly fighting in your own battles.

Also, I do like the light this paints on the Scottish leaders of his army. You know, the ones who were actually (well, more or less) qualified to lead such a rebellion.

Oh, and about the comic. It was made by the very amusing Kate Beaton who often writes historical comics on her website www.harkavagrant.com. Said comics also include one about Jane Austen, which I feel is also rather relevant to this class.

It appears to be from a documentary about the Glencoe massacre of the MacDonald clan in Scotland. This is an interesting piece of history in and of itself. However, I really chose this video because of how it gives a general overview of the time period in Scotland, and how that is the same time period as Waverly. It explains in detail a lot about it.

Ah, but you should judge for yourself.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oMYTMMdFQi8